Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Rule No 6 (Electronic Video Linkage) - This rule permits parties and witnesses to seek the use of electronic video linkage at all stages of judicial proceedings, provided applications are made in the prescribed manner. It ensures that proceedings can be conducted remotely, facilitating access and efficiency ["ALEX C. JOSEPH S/O C. A. JOSEPH VS STATE OF KERALA - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 1621"], ["VIDHYA MUNDEKKAT, Vs AKHILESH JAYARAM, - Kerala"].
Main Points of Rule 8 (Examination of Persons) - Rule 8(23) specifically allows courts to authorize proceedings via electronic video linkage when a required person's presence cannot be secured without undue delay or expense, due to reasons like sickness or physical infirmity. The court's discretion is key, and the decision must be based on genuine reasons ["Gopal. C. VS Central Bureau Of Investigation Represented By The Prosecutor, Anti-Corruption Bureau - Kerala"], ["SURESH KUMAR vs SANTHOSH - Kerala"], ["ELSAMMA, vs THE STATE OF KERALA, - Kerala"].
Mode of Service of Summons & Examination Procedures - Rule 7 deals with serving summons to witnesses via electronic linkage, and Rule 8 elaborates on the examination process, including cross-examination and recording of evidence through video linkage. The rules emphasize that virtual proceedings are to be treated as judicial proceedings, with applicable protocols ["Gopal. C. VS Central Bureau Of Investigation Represented By The Prosecutor, Anti-Corruption Bureau - Kerala"], ["VIDHYA MUNDEKKAT, Vs AKHILESH JAYARAM, - Kerala"].
Implementation & Safeguards - The rules specify that applications for electronic linkage can be made only by parties or witnesses, and the presence of a coordinator at the remote point (usually an official of Indian Embassy/Consulate) is generally required to ensure smooth proceedings. Exemptions are only granted under exceptional, genuine reasons, as per Rule 8(23) ["SURESH KUMAR vs SANTHOSH - Kerala"], ["Meenu Bobby @ Meenu Baby, D/o. Baby James vs Bobby Satheesan, S/o. Satheesan - Kerala"].
Objectives & Benefits - The overarching goal of these rules is to make courts more accessible and proceedings more expeditious, especially for witnesses or parties unable to attend physically due to health, distance, or employment abroad ["ALEX C JOSEPH vs STATE OF KERALA - Kerala"], ["GOPAL.C. vs CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION - Kerala"].
Judicial Discretion & Flexibility - Courts have the authority to permit video linkage at any stage, including during cross-examinations, framing of charges, and recording of statements, provided the conditions under Rule 8(23) are met. This flexibility supports fair trial principles while leveraging technology ["Meenu Bobby @ Meenu Baby D/o Baby James vs Bobby Satheesan S/o Satheesan - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 1686"], ["Rameshan, S/O Chellappan Achari vs State Of Kerala, Represented By The Public Prosecutor - Kerala"].
Analysis & Conclusion:Rule No 6 of the Electronic Video Linkage Rules (Kerala, 2021) empowers courts to facilitate remote participation of witnesses and parties through electronic video linkage at all stages of proceedings. The rules are designed to accommodate genuine reasons such as health issues or undue delays, allowing proceedings to continue effectively without requiring physical presence. The framework emphasizes procedural safeguards, including the appointment of coordinators at remote points, and aims to enhance judicial accessibility and efficiency using technology ["Gopal. C. VS Central Bureau Of Investigation Represented By The Prosecutor, Anti-Corruption Bureau - Kerala"], ["SURESH KUMAR vs SANTHOSH - Kerala"].
In an era where technology is reshaping justice delivery, electronic video linkage (EVL) has become a cornerstone for efficient court proceedings, especially post-pandemic. But what exactly is Electronic Video Linkage Rule No. 6, and who can invoke it? This blog dives deep into Rule 6 of the Electronic Video Linkage Rules for Courts (Kerala), 2021, exploring its provisions, implications, and recent developments. Whether you're a party to a case, a witness, or a legal professional, understanding this rule ensures compliance and smooth virtual participation.
The question often arises: what is electronic video linkage Rule No: 6? At its core, Rule 6(1) of the Electronic Video Linkage Rules for Courts (Kerala), 2021 stipulates that only parties to the proceedings or witnesses can move application seeking conduct of the proceedings through Electronic Video LinkageALEX C. JOSEPH S/O C. A. JOSEPH VS STATE OF KERALA - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 1621. This restriction ensures that requests for virtual hearings come directly from those directly involved, maintaining procedural integrity.
Proceedings via EVL are deemed judicial, equivalent to physical court appearances. All courtesies, protocols, and decorum applicable in traditional settings must be observed ALEX C. JOSEPH S/O C. A. JOSEPH VS STATE OF KERALA - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 1621. This includes the presence of a coordinator at the remote point when examining witnesses or accused persons, as outlined in Rule 5 ALEX C. JOSEPH S/O C. A. JOSEPH VS STATE OF KERALA - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 1621. However, Rule 10(1) exempts the need for a coordinator during arguments by advocates or required persons ALEX C. JOSEPH S/O C. A. JOSEPH VS STATE OF KERALA - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 1621.
Here are the key points from Rule 6 and related provisions:
These measures safeguard fairness, confidentiality, and the solemnity of judicial processes.
Rule 6 establishes a structured framework. Key definitions include 'Court Point,' 'Remote Point,' 'Remote User,' and 'Required Person,' setting the stage for seamless electronic operations ALEX C. JOSEPH S/O C. A. JOSEPH VS STATE OF KERALA - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 1621.
The rule emphasizes: proceedings conducted via electronic linkage shall be deemed judicial, with all courtesies and protocols applicableALEX C. JOSEPH S/O C. A. JOSEPH VS STATE OF KERALA - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 1621. This underscores that EVL is not a shortcut but a robust alternative.
Implications:- Restricted Initiation: Parties and witnesses must proactively apply, promoting accountability.- Protocol Compliance: Coordinators act as facilitators, especially in sensitive examinations, preventing disruptions.- Court's Role: While not explicitly outlined for suo motu actions, courts typically ensure rule compliance upon applications.
In practice, this means filings must justify the need for EVL, such as geographical constraints or safety concerns.
The 2021 rules have evolved. The Electronic Audio-Video Linkage Rules (Kerala), 2025 build on them, approved under Section 530 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. These apply to High Courts, District Courts, and tribunals, mandating confidentiality, security, and procedural integrityThe Registrar General vs The Registrar General - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 58349.
Key advancements:- Proceedings remain deemed judicial, with technological adaptations for trials and evidence recording (Paras 3 and 12) The Registrar General vs The Registrar General - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 58349.- Remote examination protocols ensure visibility and audibility for all participants The Registrar General vs The Registrar General - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 58349.
In family courts, Rule 6(2) of the 2021 rules allows video linkage for reconciliation if reasons are recorded, even without mutual consent, serving justice ATHIRA MOHANAN vs ABIJITH E.S - 2023 Supreme(Online)(KER) 9167. For instance, courts have permitted video counselling when one party is unavailable, emphasizing discretion ATHIRA MOHANAN vs ABIJITH E.S - 2023 Supreme(Online)(KER) 9167.
Rule 3(1) confirms EVL use at every stage of proceedings, with facilities like document confrontation (Rule 9) and deposition signing (Rule 8(16)) Vidhya Mundekkat D/o Kesavan Mundekkat VS Akhilesh Jayaram S/o P. C. Jayaram - 2021 Supreme(Ker) 885. Courts have dismissed transfer appeals citing these exhaustive provisions, noting no inconvenience basis when video facilities exist Vidhya Mundekkat D/o Kesavan Mundekkat VS Akhilesh Jayaram S/o P. C. Jayaram - 2021 Supreme(Ker) 885.
Audio-video recording is addressed in Rules 8(17) and (18), supporting requests like victim-mandated recordings in SC/ST cases State of Kerala, Represented By the Deputy Superintendent of Police VS Nowfal - 2022 Supreme(Ker) 75.
Courts balance technology with rights, rejecting blanket virtual trials without statutory backing under Section 273 Cr.P.C. Shahrukhkhan Abdulraufkhan Babankhan Pathan VS Azaruddin Valiuddin Saiyed - 2014 Supreme(Guj) 788.
To leverage Rule 6 effectively:
Note: This is general information based on rules and cases; consult a legal expert for case-specific advice. Rules may evolve.
Rule 6 democratizes access to justice by empowering parties and witnesses to seek EVL while upholding protocols. From 2021 foundations to 2025 enhancements, Kerala's framework exemplifies legal tech integration.
Key Takeaways:- Only parties/witnesses apply under Rule 6 ALEX C. JOSEPH S/O C. A. JOSEPH VS STATE OF KERALA - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 1621.- Virtual = Physical in legal status ALEX C. JOSEPH S/O C. A. JOSEPH VS STATE OF KERALA - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 1621.- Coordinators ensure integrity ALEX C. JOSEPH S/O C. A. JOSEPH VS STATE OF KERALA - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 1621.- Updates like 2025 rules expand scope The Registrar General vs The Registrar General - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 58349.
Stay informed on these rules to navigate modern courts efficiently. For more legal insights, follow our blog!
References:- ALEX C. JOSEPH S/O C. A. JOSEPH VS STATE OF KERALA - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 1621: Core 2021 Rules framework.- The Registrar General vs The Registrar General - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 58349: 2025 Audio-Video Rules.- ATHIRA MOHANAN vs ABIJITH E.S - 2023 Supreme(Online)(KER) 9167: Family court applications.- Vidhya Mundekkat D/o Kesavan Mundekkat VS Akhilesh Jayaram S/o P. C. Jayaram - 2021 Supreme(Ker) 885: Procedural stages.- State of Kerala, Represented By the Deputy Superintendent of Police VS Nowfal - 2022 Supreme(Ker) 75: Recording provisions. (Word count: ~1050)
#KeralaCourtRules #VideoLinkageLaw #LegalTechIndia
Rule 7 provides the mode of service of summons in relation to witnesses proposed to be examined or heard through electronic video linkage and Rule 8 deals with examination of persons. ... Court may authorise the conduct of the proceedings through Electronic Video Linkage from the place where the Required Person is situated. ... Accordingly, the objection raised by the petitioner herein was negated and finally the Special Court allowed examination of ....
Electronic Video Linkage Rules for Courts (Kerala),2021 , says that when a Required Person is unable to reach the Court point or the Remote Point due to sickness or physical infirmity or due to any genuine reason which the Court may decide, or the presence of the Required ... Rule 8(23) of the Rule 55 is to be conducted.
Moreover, as per Rule 6(1), only parties to the proceedings or witnesses can move application seeking conduct of the proceedings through Electronic Video Linkage. ... to ensure seamless electronic video linkage. ... Going by Rule 3(1), Electronic Video Linkage facilities can be used at all stages of judicial proceedings. ... As per sub-rule (2) of Rule....
6. The very objective behind introduction of the Electronic Video Linkage Rules is to make courts more accessible and the proceedings, more expeditious. ... Video Linkage.”
Rule 7 provides the mode of service of summons in relation to witnesses proposed to be examined or heard through electronic video linkage and Rule 8 deals with examination of persons. ... Court may authorise the conduct of the proceedings through Electronic Video Linkage from the place where the Required Person is situated. ... The learned Special Judge found that in the advanced era of technology, a witness could effectively be cross examined even t....
(1) These Rules shall be called "Electronic Audio-Video Linkage Rules (Kerala), 2025". ... the extant Electronic Video Linkage Rules for Courts th (Kerala) 2021, notified on August 25 2021.
Rule 6(2) of the Electronic Video Linkage Rules for Courts (Kerala), 2021 reads,- “6. ... Electronic Video Linkage. ... This rule enables the Family Court, for the reasons to be recorded in writing, to allow a party to the proceedings to attend the reconciliation process through electronic video linkage. ... Application for Appearance, Evidence and Submission th....
Sri.Alexander Joseph – learned counsel for the petitioner, argued that, as per Rule 5(4) of Ext.P12 – Electronic Video Linkage Rules for Courts (Kerala), 2021 (“Rules:” for short) framed by this Court, the Co-ordinator at the “Remote Point” must be an official of the Indian Embassy/Indian Consulate/High ... 6. ... We are afraid that, as per the “Rules”, it is the duty of the learned Trial Court to ensure that there is a Co-ordinator at the “Remote Point” as a normative rule; and that ....
Sri.Alexander Joseph – learned counsel for the petitioner, argued that, as per Rule 5(4) of Ext.P12 – Electronic Video Linkage Rules for Courts (Kerala), 2021 (“Rules” for short) framed by this Court, the Co-ordinator at the “Remote Point” must be an official of the Indian Embassy/Indian Consulate/High ... 6. ... We are afraid that, as per the “Rules” it is the duty of the learned Trial Court to ensure that there is a Co-ordinator at the “Remote Point” as a normative rule; and that an....
Rule 3(1) of the Video Linkage Rules makes it clear that the electronic video linkage facility can be used at every stage of the judicial proceedings. ... through Electronic Video Linkage. ... that both the parties file consent memorandum for Electronic Video Linkage. ... The Electronic Video Linkage Rules for Courts (Kerala),....
Rule 8(17) and (18) deals with audio video recording of Court proceedings. The Government of Kerala recently passed Electronic Video Linkage Rules for Courts (Kerala), 2021.
The provision of Section 167(2)(b) of Cr.P.C. also shows that actual production of accused before such Magistrate for the first time is compulsory. A person who is arrested without warrant cannot be treated differently. It is already observed that as per the provisions of Chapter VI and particularly Section 81 of Cr.P.C., the person arrested under warrant is required to be produced before the Executive Magistrate, having jurisdiction over the place where the arrest was made and the Chief Judicial Magistrate or the Sessions Judge has the power to decide the bail application filed by the accus....
It is submitted that therefore, even if in a serious case of sexual assault or sexual offence personal presence of the accused at the time of recording of evidence is secured but at the same time, the Courts are empowered to take appropriate measures to ensure that such person is not confronted by the accused. It is submitted that if at all the Legislature wanted dispensing personal presence of an accused in cases of sexual assault or sexual offences of the production of the accused through the medium of electronic video linkage, nothing could have prevented the Legislature from ma....
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
