Flexibility in procedural requirements during exceptional circumstances such as the COVID-19 pandemic to facilitate access to justice.

JUDGMENT

Asha Menon, J. - A young boy of 23 years of age belonging to a very poor family and in judicial custody for more than ten months having been arrested in FIR No.189/2019 under Sections 364A/365/506/323/34 of the IPC, registered at P.S. Dwarka North, New Delhi applied for bail through the online facility provided at the Dwarka Courts. However, the online filing was rejected by the Facilitation Centre of Dwarka Courts on two grounds, namely, that the Vakalatnama was not duly signed and attested either by the accused himself or his family members, and secondly, that the application was neither bookmarked nor in searchable format.

2. It is the grievance of the petitioner, (though cause title mentions Hansraj & others, only Hansraj is the petitioner, as per the memo of parties) that despite explaining the difficulty in getting an attested/signed Vakalatnama, as the counsel resided in Gurugram and the family of the applicant resided in Ghaziabad and the borders were sealed, the online filing was rejected. Accordingly, the present petition has been filed with the following prayers: -

"I. set modify/set aside the Circular No.7230- 7284/DJ/SW/DWK/2020 dated: 02.05.2020 issued by the Ld. District & Sessions Judge (S- W), Dwarka Courts, Delhi (Annexure P-1)

II. Set modify/set aside the Impugned Email (Annexure P-3) raising objections to petitioner''s bail application and the necessity of Vakalatnama being signed by accused and getting same duly attested by Jail Authorities amid this COVID-19 pandemic may kindly be exempted.

III. Pass orders, directing the concerned authority of Dwarka District Courts, New Delhi be directed to list and hear the bail application of the petitioner.

IV. Pass any other order/orders that this Hon''ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case and keeping in mind the hardships litigants have to face in the pandemic of COVID-19."

3. Sh. Pankaj Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner also pointed out that the Dwarka Courts insisted on a Certificate, which is Annexure-B [Page 24 of the paper-book], which reads as follows: -

4. According to Sh. Yadav, learned counsel, this Certificate has also to be signed by the petitioner/applicant/plaintiff, which is not possible for a person who is in judicial custody. It is submitted that once the counsel has filed the undertaking as prescribed at Annexure-A of the Circular issued by Office of District & Sessions, Dwarka Courts (S-W), Dwarka Courts: New Delhi dated 02.05.2020 and forming part of Annexure P-1 to this petition, that he would file the duly signed, verified and attested petition/application/plaint in original after the withdrawal of the lockdown, there was no occasion for insisting on another undertaking by the petitioner.

5. Sh. Rahul Mehra, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent/GNCTD pointed out that the guidelines issued by the High Court were intended to facilitate litigants and lawyers in these extraordinary times and it would be a rare advocate who would move petitions or applications without due authority, and submitted that the District Courts be directed to follow