Legal Services India - Law Articles is a Treasure House of Legal Knowledge and information, the law resources is an ever growing database of authentic legal information.
Legal Services India

» Home
Friday, January 10, 2025

Gujarat HC Orders Installation Of CCTVs In Registry, Courtrooms After Advocate Found Tampering With Case Listing

Posted in: Judiciary
Sat, Dec 16, 23, 20:15, 1 Year ago
star star star star star
0 out of 5 with 0 ratings
comments: 0 - hits: 8908
Dharmesh Jivanlal Gurjar vs Gujarat Registrar of the High Court to expeditiously complete the installation of CCTV cameras in the Registry in a strategic manner so as to ensure that no court document is tampered.

While expressing its utmost serious concerns on the glaring tampering that occurred with the case listing in Registry, the Gujarat High Court in a most learned, laudable, landmark and latest judgment titled Dharmesh Jivanlal Gurjar vs State of Gujarat in R/Special Criminal Application (Quashing) No. 996 of 2020 that was pronounced as recently as on December 13, 2023 has strictly ordered the Registrar of the High Court to expeditiously complete the installation of CCTV cameras in the Registry in a strategic manner so as to ensure that no court document is tampered. Of course, we all who are in the legal profession know fully well the far-reaching serious consequences and ramifications that the tampering of documents can have thus making a complete mockery of our entire legal system for the purpose for which they have been enacted and which is bound to have terrible irreversible consequences due to which the innocent litigants have to suffer most due to no fault of theirs! It must be noted that the Gujarat High Court alluded to a very disturbing state of affairs on the administrative side given that CCTVs were not installed despite the Registry being ordered to do so.

We must note here that the Registrar informed the Single Judge Bench comprising of Hon’ble Mr Justice Sandeep Bhatt that somebody played mischief with a very clear intention to avoid listing of a case on the ‘admission board’ of the Judge. This after Hon’ble Mr Justice Bhatt on October 9 had indicated that he would pass stringent orders on the said matter. There can be no gainsaying that what the Gujarat High Court has ordered in this leading case must definitely be ordered all over India in all the States so that it becomes next to impossible for anyone to tamper with the court documents. The Gujarat High Court directed that the exercise of installing CCTV cameras needs to be completed by January 15, 2024.

At the very outset, this brief, brilliant, bold and balanced oral judgment authored by the Single Judge Bench comprising of Hon’ble Mr Justice Sandeep Bhatt sets the ball in motion by first and foremost putting forth in para 1 that:
Pursuant to the earlier orders dated 26.10.2023, 1.11.2023, 8.11.2023 and 7.12.2023, it transpires that the Registrar General, Registrar (Vigilance) & Registrar (SCMS & ICT) and Registrar (Judicial) have made detailed searching inquiry in the matter. They have tried to find out the truth that as to how, when the matter is fixed by this Court on 25.10.2023, the matter is listed at serial number 200 in final hearing board instead of listing it in the admission board. All these aspects are recorded in the earlier order and it was coming from the record that on 21.10.2023, by using the id and password of Court Master Mr. Barot, the status of the matter is changed from one table of the Civil Board Department on 21.10.2023 around 1.30 p.m.

To put things in perspective, the Bench envisages in para 2 that:
From the report of the Registry, it transpires that there is no dispute in that regard that somebody has deliberately played mischief with a clear intention to list this matter in the final hearing board instead of admission board as the Court, on earlier occasion on 9.10.2023 has indicated that the Court will pass some stringent order in the matter. Therefore, the petitioner who is practicing advocate is also under the scanner as he and other advocates of his near circle are known for indulging in such practice, more particularly, in the DRT, of playing with the process of the legal proceeding and also playing mischief by indulging in unfair practice. Therefore, when the matter is not listed on the board of 25.10.2023 before this Court, this Court inquired with the Court Master and the Court Master, in-turn inquired from the department and it is found that the matter is listed at serial number 200 and that is also allotted to the Court of coordinate Bench of this Court (Coram: Hon’ble Mr.Justice A.Y.Kogje) as the final hearing board was listed there on that particular date.

This Court clearly indicates that the attempt was made to interfere with the administration of justice. This activity cannot be tolerated, more particularly, in the Registry of the highest Court of the State. Such unscrupulous persons should be taken to task. However, due to lack of proper installation of the cameras, more particularly, in the departments which covers each table and each corner of the Registry, the conclusive material could not be collected.

As we see, the Bench then states in para 3 that:
Along with the report of the Registrar General, the shocking aspect is brought to the notice of this Court that earlier in LPA No.2111 of 2009, the coordinate Bench of this Court (Coram : Hon’ble Mr.Justice M.R.Shah (as His Lordship then was) and Hon’ble Mr.Justice A.S.Supehia has directed as under, on 7.10.2016:

…… Registry is directed to see that no such incident takes place in future and Registrar General and Registrar (Judicial) are hereby directed to see that all precautionary measures are taken to see that no papers of judicial proceedings are missing from the Department.

Most alarmingly, the Bench minces just no words to observe succinctly in para 4 that:
Thereafter, pursuant to the said order, the matter is forwarded to the Hon’ble the Chief Justice and the Hon’ble the Chief Justice has granted permission for installation of Close Circuit Television Cameras (CCTVs) strategically in all the judicial departments of the Registry to track movement of people going towards and coming out of storage area and to ensure safety of judicial proceedings. Thereafter, the decision was also taken in the Chamber Meeting on 22.11.2016 to this effect. It further transpires that thereafter on 15.4.2023, the Section Officer of the judicial administrative branch has forwarded communication dated 15.4.2023 to the Additional Secretary to the Hon’ble the Chief Justice for supplying necessary documents and by requesting him to make necessary arrangement to expedite the installation of close circuit television cameras in the judicial departments including newly allotted department functioning in the old GP building. In turn, it transpires from the record that on 19.4.2023, the Additional Secretary to the Hon’ble the Chief Justice, has, after getting approval from the Hon’ble the Chief Justice, forwarded note with necessary documents to the Registrar (SCMS & ICT) with a specific mention about the purchase, supply, installation, commissioning, operation and maintenance of IP based CCTV Camera Surveillance System for the purpose of security, monitoring and recording in the judicial departments including newly allotted departments functional from the old GP building as also at various locations where there is no reach of the existing CCTV camera surveillance system within the campus of the Gujarat High Court at Sola, Ahmedabad.

However, reasons best known to the Registrar (SCMS & ICT), it transpires that no further development has taken place though the matter is having such urgency and seriousness, that too, inspite of the specific approval given by the Hon’ble the Chief Justice, for almost about eight months i.e. till today. This is very disturbing state of affairs on the side of the administration of the High Court. Therefore, if such cameras would have been installed in the building, more particularly, in the civil board then the real culprit would have been immediately identified and could have been booked.

As things stands, the Bench then states in para 5 that:
In the present case, there are several suspects identified during the course of inquiry but there is no conclusive material available which can undoubtedly establish that the said person or persons have played mischief which is narrated earlier in this order.

Most significantly and most forthrightly, the Bench mandates in para 6 directing and observing that:
This is very shocking that though this Court has passed earlier order on 8.11.2023 to do needful for the installation of CCTV cameras, from the report of the Registrar, it transpires that no further progress is made in this direction even after such incident has taken place. This situation cannot be tolerated and continued any further. Therefore, let the Registrar General, with the help of Registrar (SCMS & ICT), Registrar (Vigilance) and Registrar (Judicial) do needful in the matter by also coordinating with the Additional Secretary to the Hon’ble the Chief Justice, who is in-charge of CCTV cameras to expedite the process of installation of cameras in each corner of the Registry strategically covering every table and in functional mode and also if required the cameras can be installed in the Court rooms also as stated by the Registrars. Such exercise now should be expedited in view of the earlier decision taken in the chamber meeting of this Court as well as the order passed by the coordinate Bench, as stated earlier in the order and shall implement the same as expeditiously as possible, but not later than 15.1.2024. Let the Registry do the needful from today onwards and expedite the procedure, otherwise this Court may have to observe regarding such lack luster approach which causes such harm in the administration of the Registry as well as for deciding such issue about the involvement of the such persons in playing mischief.

For sake of clarity, the Bench clarifies in para 7 stating that:
Though learned advocate Mr.Gajjar at the relevant point of time has prayed for withdrawal of this petition and the Court is otherwise also not inclined to grant any prayer and the petition is required to be dismissed but with a view to see that the things which have cropped up during the course of hearing of the present matter and with a view to ensure compliance from the Registry, the matter is required to be kept pending and therefore the matter is not disposed off today though the fate of the matter is decided.

Do note, the Bench then clarifies and directs in para 8 that:
Another aspect is that pursuant to the earlier order, the Bar Council of Gujarat has initiated some action against the petitioner and initially it was stated before this Court that the petitioner, who is advocate, is suspended for six months and disciplinary proceedings are initiated. Let the periodical compliance report, as directed in the earlier order, at interval of every three months be furnished by the Bar Council of Gujarat to the Registrar General, who in turn, will bring such report to the notice of this Court.

Quite forthrightly, the Bench then propounds in para 9 directing that:
Pursuant to the direction given to the DRT to take corrective measures, the Presiding Officer DRT has also submitted report through the Registrar of the DRT and he has stated the action taken pursuant to the improvement of administration of justice. It is expected that not only the DRT, even the lower courts, any labour court or NCLT or any Tribunal which are working in the State of Gujarat must see that if any person is indulging in malpractice or any improper practice, then it is the duty of the Presiding Officer of that particular Tribunal or Court to prevent such practice, otherwise it can be inferred that such Presiding Officer is also approving such practice and the allegation of connivance of that officer can be also made by the common litigants, which situation is required to be avoided.

It is worth noting that the Bench then directs in para 10 that:
Considering the report which is received from the Registry, let the Registry take further call in the matter by trying to find out the truth about the actual role played in the mischief committed on 9.10.2023. Prima facie, the inquiry carried out by the Registry is found satisfactory and is taken on record which is kept in the separate cover in safe custody of this Court until the dismissal of this petition.

Finally, the Bench then concludes by directing in para 11 that:
Re-list this matter on 18.1.2024 for further consideration.

In sum, while one has to concede that this most courageous, commendable and creditworthy judgment is meant only to be implemented for Gujarat but I very strongly feel that this must be definitely directed by the Apex Court taking suo motu cognizance to be implemented by all the States by installing CCTVs in Registry and all courtrooms. This will certainly ensure that there can be no tampering very easily with the court records in any manner. This will also ensure that no advocate, no court staff member or anyone else can ever tamper with the court document in any manner which tantamounts to sabotaging the very purpose for which courts are meant! No denying it!

Sanjeev Sirohi, Advocate,
s/o Col (Retd) BPS Sirohi, A 82, Defence Enclave,
Sardhana Road, Kankerkhera, Meerut – 250001, Uttar Pradesh.

Legal Services India

Comments

There are no comments for this article.
Only authorized users can leave comments. Please sign in first, or register a free account.
Share
Sponsor
About Author
Sanjeev Sirohi Advocate
Member since Apr 20, 2018
Location: Meerut, UP
Following
User not following anyone yet.
You might also like
Rahendra Baglari v. Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (M) writ petitioner for adjoining a Judicial Magistrate and the High Court and its Registry as Respondents to his plea against the order passed by the said Magistrate.
Navin Chandra Dhoundiyal vs.Uttarakhand long standing or established status quo brought about by judgments interpreting local or state laws, should not be lightly departed from.
Maharashtra has 4 high court benches at Panaji, Nagpur, Aurangabad and Kolhapur apart from High Court at Mumbai but on the contrary UP which has maximum pending cases in India
It is most shocking to see that a peaceful, one of the most developed and most prosperous state like Maharashtra has 4 high court benches at Panaji, Nagpur, Aurangabad and Kolhapur
I am neither a member nor supporter of BJP or any other political party nor a member of any of BJP's affiliated organizations like the RSS or VHP or any other organization.
Kirti vs Oriental Insurance Company Limited advocates cannot throw away legal rights or enter into arrangements contrary to law. It was also made clear that any concession in law made in this regard by either counsel would not bind the parties.
Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) on December 28, 2020 had expressed shock and deep concern on the arbitrary, illegal and brazen exercise of brute power by the police against lawyers, including the search conducted at the premises of an advocate representing some of the accused in the North-East Delhi riots cases.
media trial during criminal investigation interferes with administration of justice and hence amounts to contempt of court as defined under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
Jamal v. Maharashtra dismissed a plea filed by the National President of BJP Minority Morcha – Jamal Anwar Siddiqui seeking 'X' category security.
Duroply Industries Limited and anr. Vs Ma Mansa Enterprises Private Limited in exercise of its ordinary original civil jurisdiction has recalled its own order of an injunction passed in a trademark dispute as the Judge presiding over the case had appeared for one party in respect of the same trademark in the past.
At the outset, it must be stated rather disconcertingly that it is India's misfortune that UP which has the maximum population more than 23 crore as Yogi Adityanath
At the outset, it has to be stated without mincing any words that it merits no reiteration that Judges age for retirement must be now increased to 75
Rajeev Bhardwaj v. H.P while dismissing a plea seeking a declaration of a sitting Judge's dissenting view as Coram non-judice and non est in the eyes of law.
Adv KG Suresh vs UOI has declared as unconstitutional the bar on lawyers representing parties in matters before the Maintenance Tribunals constituted under the Maintenance Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (Maintenance Act).
Bar Council of India ensured that there is an entrance exam now for all those lawyers who want to practice which has to be cleared before lawyers can start practicing.
It is a matter of grave concern that while our Constitution enshrines the right to equality as postulated in Article 14 but in practice what we witness is just the reverse.
seeking interim bail/parole for the under-privileged and under-trial prisoners/convicts keeping in view the terrible havoc unleashed by the second wave of the Covid-19 pandemic.
When an intellectual giant like Fali Sam Nariman whom I personally rate as the world's top jurist and it is not just me but his extremely impeccable credentials are acknowledged in legal field, it is not just India but the whole world which listens to him in silence
Treasa Josfine vs Kerala that a woman who is fully qualified cannot be denied of her right to be considered for employment on the ground that she is a woman and because the nature of the employment would require her to work during night hours.
Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs constituted a Committee to suggest reforms in our criminal justice system which has been facing repeated criticism for its various drawbacks
Congress government's rule in Centre, Kapil Sibal who was Union Law Minister had written very categorically to UP Government for creating a high court bench for West UP at Meerut
completely about the truthfulness of the retracted confession and should corroborate his/her confession as it is unsafe to convict an accused person solely on the basis of the retracted confession
Thabir Sagar vs Odisha the practice of Advocate's clerks filing affidavits on behalf of parties is unacceptable. Such a practice is in gross violation of Rule 26 of the Orissa High Court Rules. It has therefore rightly directed its Registry to ensure that steps are taken forthwith to stop the practice of accepting such affidavits
COVID situation in UP, the Allahabad High Court has issued revised fresh guidelines for the functioning of all the Courts and Tribunals subordinate to it.
amended its rules to make criticism and attack of Bar Council decisions by members a misconduct and ground for disqualification or suspension or removal of membership of a member from the Bar Council.
CJI NV Ramana who was appointed as the 48th CJI on 6th April, 2021 and took oath as CJI on 24th April 2021 has very rightly expressed his concern on the social media noise and how it adversely impacts the institutions also like judiciary to a great extent which actually should not be the case.
At the crucial meeting of the Central Action Committee. of more than 20 districts of Bar Association of West UP held at Aligarh
Why UP which is among the largest States, has maximum population more than 24 crore which is more than even Pakistan
When finances are needed for the purpose of improving the judicial system at the lower levels, there is reluctance to make such finances available.
rarely ever booked and made to face the consequences which only serves to further encourage men in uniform to take it for granted to indulge in worst custodial torture
Tarun Saxena vs Union of India as ultra vires Section 17 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 which bars lawyers from representing parties in matters before the Maintenance Tribunals
Dhanbad district of Jharkhand was mowed down by an autorickshaw has sent shivers down the spine. The ghastly incident happened on morning of July 28 near the Magistrate colony of Dhanbad that was close to the Judge's residence.
Suman Chadha & Anr. vs. Central Bank of India in that the wilful breach of the undertaking given to the Court can amount to Contempt under Section 2(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act.
Rajasthan High Court Rules for Video Conferencing for Courts 2020 which shall be applicable to the proceeding of the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan and all the Subordinate Courts of the Rajasthan with immediate effect.
Arun Singh Chauhan v/s MP deprecate the conduct of a practicing advocate who chose not to answer the repeated queries of the Court pertaining to the maintainability of his petition seeking issuance of a writ of quo warranto and regarding the non-impleadment of a necessary party
Dr.Mukut Nath Verma vs UoI Allahabad High Court imposed Rs 5 lakh costs on an advocate Dr Mukut Nath Verma after concluding that he unauthorisedly filed a writ petition on behalf of suspended and absconding IPS officer Mani Lal Patidar and also levelled serious allegations against state authorities and thereby misleading the Court.
Anil JS vs Kerala that instances of allegations about the police disrespecting the citizens were arriving at its doors with alarming regularity and therefore issued certain general directions in its judgment.
If there is one Judge on whom I have blind faith for his exemplary conduct throughout his brilliant career and who can never favour wrongly even his own son
Indianisation of our legal system is the need of the hour and it is crucial to make the justice delivery system more accessible and effective.
the gang war of different gangs have now reached right up to the court premises itself which are supposed to be the holiest shrines for getting justice.
It is not just for enjoying life or going for some holiday trip that lawyers of West UP repeatedly keep going on strike since last many decades.
CM Yogi Adityanath UP has progressed by leaps and bounds which one certainly cannot deny but why is it that it has just one High Court Bench only and that too just approximately 200 km away at the city famously called Nawab City
Just changing name of Allahabad to Prayagraj won't change the ground reality. It is a proven fact that High Court is still called Allahabad High Court and not Prayagraj High Court.
It is most shocking that all the Chief Justices of India from 1947 till 2000 were never shocked nor were any world famous jurist like Nani Ardeshir Palkhiwala, Ram Jethmalani, Shanti Bhushan, Prashant Bhushan among many others
Raggu Baniya @ Raghwendra vs UP has directed the Uttar Pradesh Government to instruct the District Magistrates of all the districts to re-evaluate the cases for remission after 14 years of incarceration even if appeals in such cases are pending in the High Court.
Union Minister of State for Law and Justice – SP Singh Baghel who is also an MP from Agra again in Western UP and who just recently took over has made it clear that his ministry was open to the setting up of a Bench of the Allahabad High Court in Western UP.
Anil Kumar and Anr. Vs Amit that the practice of advocates acting as power of attorney holders of their clients and also as advocates in the matter, is contrary to the provisions of the Advocates Act, 1961.
Shashank Singh vs/ Honourable High Court of Judicature at Allahabad that under Article 233 of the Constitution of India, a Judicial Officer regardless of his or her previous experience, as an Advocate, cannot apply and compete for appointment to any vacancy in the post of District Judge.
It must be stated at the very outset that it is quite bewildering and baffling to see that the state of UP which Ban ki moon who is the former UN Secretary General had slammed as the rape and crime capital of India
most powerfully raised vocally the legitimate demand for a High Court Bench in West UP which is the crying need of the hour also.
Top