Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
V.G.ARUN, J.
Abhil C.R S/o Renjith Kumar - Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala - Respondent
CRL.MC NO. 1657 OF 2025
Decided On : 06-03-2025
(A) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Section 22(c) - Non-bailable warrant issued against accused for absence during trial proceedings - Court allowed virtual appearance for plea recording under Video Conferencing Rules - Accused must submit application for virtual appearance and undertake not to dispute identity. (Paras 2 , 5 , 7 )
(B) Video Conferencing Rules - Purpose is to facilitate access to justice - Accused can appear through Counsel for plea recording, provided certain conditions are met. (Paras 5 , 7 )
Facts of the case:
The petitioner, accused in a narcotics case, was granted bail and permission to study abroad. He was absent during trial proceedings, leading to a non-bailable warrant being issued against him. The petitioner sought to quash this warrant and allow virtual presence for plea recording.
Findings of Court:
The court ruled that the petitioner could appear virtually for plea recording, provided he submits an application and undertakes not to dispute his identity.
Issues: The main issues were whether the court could allow virtual appearance for plea recording and the conditions required for such an allowance.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the Video Conferencing Rules facilitate justice and that an accused can appear through Counsel for plea recording, subject to an undertaking regarding identity. The court also noted that appropriate applications must be made for virtual appearances.
Result: Crl.M.C disposed of with directions.
The court's decision emphasizes the importance of facilitating access to justice through the use of Video Conferencing Rules, especially in circumstances where physical presence is challenging for the accused. It recognizes that an accused can appear through Counsel for plea recording, provided certain conditions are met to ensure the integrity of the proceedings.
Specifically, the court has clarified that an accused wishing to appear virtually must submit a formal application requesting such mode of appearance. This application should include an undertaking by the accused that he will not dispute his identity and that his Counsel will be present to make the plea on his behalf, if applicable (!) . The purpose of this requirement is to maintain the authenticity of the proceedings and prevent any disputes regarding the accused’s identity.
Furthermore, the court has indicated that, in appropriate cases, the plea can be recorded through a Counsel, which can be facilitated via virtual appearance. The accused must give a clear undertaking that he will not contest his identity and that his Counsel will be available throughout the proceedings. This ensures that the proceedings are conducted smoothly and that the rights of all parties are protected (!) .
In summary, the argument for allowing virtual appearance or plea recording through Counsel hinges on the submission of a proper application accompanied by an undertaking by the accused. This approach balances the need for access to justice with the necessity of safeguarding the integrity and authenticity of the judicial process.
ORDER :
Petitioner is the 6th accused in S.C. No.1490 of 2023 on the files of the Additional Sessions Judge-I, Ernakulam. The case originated from Crime No.382 of 2023 registered at the Thrikkakara Police Station for the offence punishable under Section 22(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act).
2. The petitioner was granted bail by this Court as per order dated 30.09.2023. Subsequently, at the request of the petitioner, trial court granted permission to travel to the United Kingdom for pursuing his studies in M.Sc. Digital Marketing at the Coventry University, U.K. The case was posted on 12.03.2024 for framing of charge and the petitioner being absent, trial court framed and read over charges to the other accused. The case was then posted to 16.03.2024 for framing charges against the petitioner. Even though, petitioner appeared through Video Conferencing mode on that day, the charge was not read over to him. The charge was not read over on the subsequent dates also, as the petitioner was not present in person. The court also proceeded to issue non-bailable warrant against the petitioner due to his absence. This Crl.M.C is hence filed, seeking the following reliefs:
“i) Quash the order/proceedings dated 05-07-2024 in Sessions Case No. 1490/2023 of Court of Additional Sessions Judge-I, Ernakulam issuing a non-bailable warrant against the petitioner and the notice to his sureties.
ii) Permit the petitioner to appear through VC for the remaining proceedings, in Sessions Case No. 1490/2023 of Court of Additional Sessions Judge-I, Ernakulam including trial, and direct the trial court to accept his virtual presence for all required hearings.
ⅲ) Declare that the bail bond of the petitioner stands reinstated, as if no order of cancellation or forfeiture of bail bond was issued in Sessions Case No. 1490/2023 of Court of Additional Sessions Judge-I, Ernakulam.”
3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that, since his client was present through virtual mode on 16.03.2024, court could have read over the charges and recorded his plea. According to the learned Counsel the petitioner can even be allowed to appear through Counsel for the purpose of recording his plea. In support of this contention reliance is placed on the decision of the Apex Court in Bhaskar Industries Ltd. v. Bhiwani Denim And Apparels Ltd [2001 (7) SCC 401] with specific reference to paragraph Nos.17 and 18 therein. It is submitted that the duration of petitioner’s M.Sc. Course is for one more year and he will not be able to return to India until then.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that if the petitioner was desirous of his plea being recorded through virtual mode, he should have made an application for that purpose. The court cannot be faulted for not framing the charge and recording petitioner’s plea in the absence of an application.
5. With the introduction of the Video Conferencing Rules, it is now possible to permit appearance of accused through virtual mode in almost all stages of a case. The very purpose of the Video Conferencing Rules is to make access to justice easier for the parties. Hence, for the purpose of reading over the charge and recording the plea, accused can be permitted to appear through virtual mode. Needles to say, if the accused wants to appear through virtual mode he should submit appropriate application. As contended by the Counsel for the petitioner, court can even allow the Counsel to make the plea on behalf of the accused. Being contextually relevant paragraph No.17 of the judgment in Bhaskar Industries Ltd. (supra) is extracted hereunder:
“Thus, in appropriate cases the Magistrate can allow an accused to make even the first appearance through a Counsel. The Magistrate is empowered to record the plea of the accused even when his Counsel makes such plea on behalf of the accused in a case where the personal appearance of the accused is dispensed with. S.317 of the Code has to be viewed in the above perspe
The court allows virtual appearance for plea recording under the Video Conferencing Rules, provided the accused submits an application and undertakes not to dispute identity.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the permissibility of dispensing with the physical presence of the accused during trial and allowing appearance through video conferencing, in line....
The court allowed a physically incapacitated accused to appear via virtual mode for judgment pronouncement, emphasizing the use of technology to ensure justice.
Accused can appear via electronic video linkage for trial to ensure justice without physical presence.
Balancing the interests of the convict and the rights of the appellate court in allowing appearance through video conferencing under Section 437A of Cr.P.C.
The court allowed the relaxation of video conferencing rules enabling a complainant abroad to record evidence, emphasizing the role of discretion to avoid undue hardship in legal proceedings.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
