LI Network
Published on: November 11, 2023 at 00:30 IST
The Supreme Court expressed concerns regarding the omission of material witness depositions from the record, noting that such oversights frequently lead to repeated adjournments, contributing to the backlog and delays in the resolution of appeals.
The bench, consisting of Justices Sanjay Karol and Abhay S. Oka, addressed this issue while hearing an appeal against a Kerala High Court judgment in a murder case.
Notably, the apex court upheld the conviction of the appellants in this case, a tragedy that occurred 20 years ago.
To expedite the legal process and enhance efficiency, the Court scrutinized Order XX of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013, focusing on sub-rules 2 and 3 of Rule 5.
These rules currently mandate the procurement of physical copies of original records in criminal appeals, particularly those involving life sentences or the death penalty.
To streamline the requisition of case records in criminal appeals, the Court recommended the following amendments:
- E-Copies of Original Records: Amend Sub-Rule 3 to include the term “soft copy” before “original records,” allowing for the requisition of e-copies. This modification aims to expedite the availability of records to the court and align with environmentally conscious practices.
- Extension of Requisition: Propose amendments to extend the requisition of soft copies to cases where leave is granted against an order of acquittal or conviction, broadening the scope of the process.
- Soft Copies for Counsels: Once received, provide soft copies of the records to the learned counsel representing the parties involved, ensuring accessibility and efficiency.
Emphasizing the importance of transparency and accessibility, the Court directed the Registry to present a copy of this judgment to the Chief Justice of India for consideration and appropriate directions if deemed necessary.
This move by the Supreme Court reflects a commitment to leveraging technology for a more streamlined legal process, ultimately contributing to the faster resolution of criminal appeals.
Case Title: Sajeev v. State of Kerala
