ORDER

Petitioner is the accused in C.C.No.1 of 2016 pending before the Court of Special Judge, CBI, Thiruvananthapuram. During trial, a petition was filed seeking permission for the Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner to conduct cross- examination of the prosecution witnesses through video conferencing. Permission was sought citing health reasons and the counsel's inability to travel up to Thiruvananthapuram. The learned Sessions Judge having rejected the petition, this Crl.M.C is filed.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that, Electronic Video Linkage Rules for Courts (Kerala), 2021 ('the Rules' for short) is intended to enable, among other things, cross-examination through video conferencing also. In support of the argument, attention is drawn to the definitions of the words 'Advocate', 'Court Point', 'Court User,' 'Remote Point', 'Remote User' and 'Required Person' in Rule 2, the Principles laid down in Rule 3, the procedure for Examination of Persons contained in Rule 8 as wel