Supreme Court: Calling for installation of CCTV cameras in Courts, the bench of AK Goel and UU Lalit, JJ said that there is no need for privacy in courtrooms as nothing private happens there. The bench said:

“Judges don’t need privacy in court proceedings. Nothing private is happening here. We all are sitting in front of you.”

Additional Solicitor General Pinky Anand, appearing for Centre, said that the installation of CCTVs and video recording of court proceedings was important and would be beneficial for all. She submitted before the Court that the Ministry of Law and Justice has to sanction a proposal for financial outlay, which could be accorded any time soon. The Court, hence, asked the Centre to submit the report on the next date of hearing i.e. 23.11.2017. It said that this step was in larger public interest, discipline and security and hence, it should be delayed.

On August 14, the apex court had favoured installation of CCTV cameras with audio recording of all court proceedings, including in its own complex along with those of the high courts and tribunals, to bring in transparency.

Source: PTI

Must Watch

maintenance to second wife

bail in false pretext of marriage

right to procreate of convict

Criminology, Penology and Victimology book release

One comment

  • We welcome the idea of having CCTVs installed in all courts and recording of entire legal proceedings and the copy of the same to be furnished to the contesting parties on payment of charge.The court proceedings can be made online so that it can be watched by the clients.In majority of the subordinate courts, clients are not allowed to sit in the court halls.They are made to stand outside, when the legal proceedings of their case is going on in the court hall.No waiting room is provided for them.They have to stand in the hot sun in the court compound until I their Advocates tell them to go.This is leaving room for Advocates to collude with each other in the court halls and in some cases the Judges favouring some Advocates,and their Judgements are based on their face value of the Advocates and not on the merits of the case.

Join the discussion

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.