Above: The Punjab and Haryana High Court has finally allowed a petitioner to appear through conferencing via Whatsapp and Skype/Photo: Wikimedia
In a novel move, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has allowed an NRI to depose in a case through a video chat app, thereby ensuring his safety and saving time and money
~By Vipin Pubby in Chandigarh
It was nearly three years ago that a judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court agreed to record evidence from an NRI in the US through video-conferencing. It was a pioneering step taken by Justice K Kannan following a plea by the petitioner, Sucha Singh, that he faced threat from the opposite party in India and that it was difficult for him to travel all the way to the country to depose in the case. Accepting his plea, the judge allowed him to appear in the court using video-conferencing but with a caveat: the conferencing had to be arranged by the Indian consulate or some other public office in the US.
It took nearly three years for the petitioner to convince the High Court that arranging the video-conferencing by the Indian consulate or any government office in America was a tough task due to the diametrically opposite time zones. Neither the Indian diplomats in the US nor any American government office was willing to open its facilities in the middle of the night to help him depose before an Indian court where the time difference was about 12 hours.
Sucha Singh, through his counsel Paramjit Batta, pleaded that involvement of the Indian diplomatic mission or of any government office in the US was unnecessary as the technology available commonly was not tamperable. The video-conferencing could be easily done with the help of several apps and tools accessible to everyone. Moreover, the defendants could be asked to identify the petitioner through video-conferencing.
Justice Kuldip Singh of the Punjab and Haryana High Court finally allowed the petitioner earlier this month to appear through video chat apps like Whatsapp or Skype. It asked the civil judge in a Punjab court to fix a date and time to record the statement of Sucha Singh.
The case involves dispute over a property between Sucha Singh and Ajmer Singh, former chairman of Verka, a milk cooperative society owned by the Punjab government. Sucha Singh had taken the plea that Ajmer Singh was the brother of former Punjab minister Sharanjit Singh Dhillon, who could use his political clout against him.
Advocate Paramjit Batta said that Sucha Singh’s presence was necessary to examine some documents claimed by the opposite party. “The opposite party is very influential and has involved the petitioner’s mother and sister in some civil and criminal litigation and he apprehends his safety will be at peril if he comes to India,” Batta argued.
In his orders, Justice Kuldip Singh said: “I am of the view that the evidence of Sucha Singh, who is party to the case, is very material. He is living in the USA. Since there is 12-hour difference of time, when it is day in India, it is night time in the USA. Therefore, there will be a difficulty in approaching any public authority at night time to allow video-conferencing facility. Video-conferencing is now available in computers and mobiles and so many (video chatting) applications are available like FaceTime, WhatsApp, Skype and other similar ones.”
He directed the petitioner to apprise the trial court about the mode of device or mobile application which he intended to use and the time when he would be available on such application to present himself in the court during the trial. It asked the trial court in Samrala under Ludhiana district to fix a convenient date for examination and cross-examination of Sucha Singh through video-conferencing. “The said witness shall be identified by the opposite party or any other person nominated by them,” it ruled.
Batta said that the date and time for recording his client’s disposition has not been decided yet due to vacations in the subordinate courts. He said a petition to fix the time and date suitable to both sides would be filed as soon as the courts reopen after the summer break.
While it is believed that this was the first such case in which an NRI was allowed to appear through video-conferencing in a property dispute, there have been instances where courts have allowed disposition through video-conferencing. Trial courts frequently use this method to record evidence and hear bail petitions. These include high-profile cases like the Beant Singh murder case and the Gurmeet Ram Rahim case.
In one such recent case, a Pune civil court had last year granted divorce to an NRI couple who had sought mutual divorce. While the husband had appeared before the court, his wife, a London-based IT professional, deposed through video-conferencing. Normally, the physical presence of the couple is required for granting mutual divorce.
Talk about technology being used to mete out justice.