Case BriefsSupreme Court

Supreme Court: The 3-judge bench of the former CJI SA Bobde and L. Nageswara Rao and S. Ravindra Bhatt, JJ had issued detailed directions to all Courts dealing with suits and execution proceedings after the troubles of the decree holder in not being able to enjoy the fruits of litigation on account of inordinate delay caused during the process of execution of decree were brought to the Court’s notice.

The Court noticed,

“Remedies provided for preventing injustice are actually being misused to cause injustice, by preventing a timely implementation of orders and execution of decrees.”

As on 31.12.2018, there were 11,80,275 execution petitions pending in the subordinate courts.

Hence, considering the urgent need to reduce delays in the execution proceedings, the Court issued the following directions:

  1. In suits relating to delivery of possession, the court must examine the parties to the suit under Order X in relation to third party interest and further exercise the power under Order XI Rule 14 asking parties to disclose and produce documents, upon oath, which are in possession of the parties including declaration pertaining to third party interest in such properties.
  2. In appropriate cases, where the possession is not in dispute and not a question of fact for adjudication before the Court, the Court may appoint Commissioner to assess the accurate description and status of the property.
  3. After examination of parties under Order X or production of documents under Order XI or receipt of commission report, the Court must add all necessary or proper parties to the suit, so as to avoid multiplicity of proceedings and also make such joinder of cause of action in the same suit.
  4. Under Order XL Rule 1 of CPC, a Court Receiver can be appointed to monitor the status of the property in question as custodia legis for proper adjudication of the matter.
  5. The Court must, before passing the decree, pertaining to delivery of possession of a property ensure that the decree is unambiguous so as to not only contain clear description of the property but also having regard to the status of the property.
  6. In a money suit, the Court must invariably resort to Order XXI Rule 11, ensuring immediate execution of decree for payment of money on oral application.
  7. In a suit for payment of money, before settlement of issues, the defendant may be required to disclose his assets on oath, to the extent that he is being made liable in a suit. The Court may further, at any stage, in appropriate cases during the pendency of suit, using powers under Section 151 CPC, demand security to ensure satisfaction of any decree.
  8. The Court exercising jurisdiction under Section 47 or under Order XXI of CPC, must not issue notice on an application of third-party claiming rights in a mechanical manner. Further, the Court should refrain from entertaining any such application(s) that has already been considered by the Court while adjudicating the suit or which raises any such issue which otherwise could have been raised and determined during adjudication of suit if due diligence was exercised by the applicant.
  9. The Court should allow taking of evidence during the execution proceedings only in exceptional and rare cases where the question of fact could not be decided by resorting to any other expeditious method like appointment of Commissioner or calling for electronic materials including photographs or video with affidavits.
  10. The Court must in appropriate cases where it finds the objection or resistance or claim to be frivolous or mala fide, resort to Sub-rule (2) of Rule 98 of Order XXI as well as grant compensatory costs in accordance with Section 35A.
  11. Under section 60 of CPC the term “…in name of the judgment- debtor or by another person in trust for him or on his behalf” should be read liberally to incorporate any other person from whom he may have the ability to derive share, profit or property.
  12. The Executing Court must dispose of the Execution Proceedings within six months from the date of filing, which may be extended only by recording reasons in writing for such delay.
  13. The Executing Court may on satisfaction of the fact that it is not possible to execute the decree without police assistance, direct the concerned Police Station to provide police assistance to such officials who are working towards execution of the decree. Further, in case an offence against the public servant while discharging his duties is brought to the knowledge of the Court, the same must be dealt stringently in accordance with law.
  14. The Judicial Academies must prepare manuals and ensure continuous training through appropriate mediums to 32 the Court personnel/staff executing the warrants, carrying out attachment and sale and any other official duties for executing orders issued by the Executing Courts.

[Rahul S. Shah v. Jinendra Kumar Gandhi, 2021 SCC OnLine SC 341, decided on 22.04.2021]

For Appellant: Advocate Shailesh Madiyal

For Respondent: Advocate Paras Jain

Case BriefsCOVID 19High Courts

Delhi High Court: Full Bench of Vipin Sanghi, Rekha Palli and Talwant Singh, JJ., took suo motu cognizance of the extraordinary circumstances i.e. the alarming resurgence of COVID-19 pandemic under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.

Bench ordered that all matters pending before the Court and Subordinate Courts, wherein interim orders issued were subsisting as on 19-04-2021 and expired or will expire thereafter, shall stand automatically extended till 16-07-2021 or until further order, except where any orders to the contrary have been passed by the Supreme Court of India in any particular matter, during the intervening period.

In case any party faces any hardship due to the above-stated order of this Court, they would be at liberty to seek appropriate relief.

High Court directed that the Order be uploaded on the website of this Court and conveyed to all the Standing Counsel, UOI, GNCTD, DDA, Civic Authorities, Delhi High Court Bar Association and all other Bar Associations of Delhi as well as to all District Courts subordinate to this Court.

Matter to be listed on 16-07-2021.[Court on its own motion v. State (GNCTD), WP (C) No. 4921 of 2021, decided on 20-04-2021]

Advocates before the Court:

For the Respondent: Mr Santosh Kumar Tripathi, ASC, GNCTD with Mr Aditya P. Khanna, Advocate.

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Madras High Court: N. Anand Venkatesh, J., issued guidelines pertaining to deal with cases wherein accused persons are absconded leading to the pendency of cases in subordinate courts.

Pendency of cases

Petitioners Counsel submitted that an FIR was registered and final report for the same was taken by the lower Court for offence under Sections 147, 148, 341, 302 of Penal Code, 1860. Further, It was stated that since some of the accused persons were absconding, the case was being kept pending for the last 8 years without being committed to the appropriate Court.

Adding to the above, Counsel also stated that the petitioner was aged about 70 years, but no progress in the lower Court took place, instead of splitting up the case, it kept on being adjourned on the ground that the accused persons were not present or that the non-bailable warrant was pending.

Analysis and Decision

Accused Persons Absconding

Court noted the fact that several petitions have been filed before the Court wherein case have been kept pending in light of certain accused persons being absconding and subordinate Courts finding the said issue have been finding the same to be a hurdle while dealing with the cases.

The above-stated issue leads to the pendency of the case.

Hence, the Court found this to be the right time to issue certain guidelines for the Court below to deal with the cases in which accused persons have been absconding.

Criminal Rules of practice and Circular Orders, 1958 provides for dealing with cases where the accused persons have absconded.


Guidelines to be kept in mind while dealing with cases of absconding accused:

  1. Where the Court has issued process for the appearance of an accused and the same could not be served and if the Court is satisfied that the accused is in absconding, the Court may, after having waited for a reasonable time, proceed under Section 82 of the CrPC.
  2. If the case involves a single accused against whom proceedings have been initiated under Section 82 of the Code, the Court shall shift the case from relevant register to the register of long-pending cases.
  3. When there are several accused persons in a case and only some of them have appeared or have been produced before the Court and if the Court is satisfied that the presence of other accused cannot be secured within a reasonable time, having due regard to the right of such of the accused in attendance to have the case against them enquired into or tried without delay, the Court may split up the case if it is satisfied that such splitting up will cause no prejudice either to the prosecution or to the accused in attendance and proceed with the enquiry or trial as regards the accused who are in attendance.
  4. While splitting up the case as referred, the Court shall assign a fresh number to the split-up case relating to the absconding accused and enter the same in the relevant register of the current year.
  5. In a case exclusively triable by Sessions Court, when there are several accused persons and only some of them have appeared or have been produced before the Court, the Magistrate Court shall follow the same procedure mutatis mutandis till the stage of splitting up of case.
  6. Magistrate Court shall thereafter comply with the provisions of Section 207 or Section 208, as the case may be, insofar as the accused in attendance and commit the case to the Court of Session.
  7. Sessions Court shall be reported about the split-up of the case and the Sessions Court shall assign a number to the split-up case, enter the same in the sessions Register and communicate the number to the Magistrate Court forthwith. The Magistrate Court shall also indicate this number in brackets along with the fresh number assigned to the split-up case relating to the absconding accused.
  8. As and when the absconding accused appears and is produced before the Magistrate Court, the Magistrate Court shall comply with clause (vi) and while committing the case to the Court of Session shall indicate the number assigned by the Sessions Court for the split up the case.
  9. Clauses (i) to (vii) above shall apply, as far as may be to cases where an accused person has appeared but has subsequently absconded.
  10. If the accused has absconded after committal of the case, the Sessions Judge shall follow the same procedure under clauses (ii) to (iv).

Practice provisions of Section 299 CrPC

High Court also stressed upon the need to put in practice the provisions of Section 299 CrPC by the trial courts which deals with recording of evidence in the absence of accused.

  • Record the order which proves that the accused has absconded and there is no immediate prospect of his arrest.
  • Depositions of prosecution witnesses may be recorded and attest and file the same in the split-up case for the purpose of furnishing it to the absconded accused as and when they appear.
  • The above-stated deposition can be given in evidence against the accused in any inquiry or trial for the offence with which he is charged, provided that the witness is either dead or he is incapable of giving evidence or his attendance would cause unreasonable delay, expense or inconvenience.[Exception to the principle embodied in Section 33 of Evidence Act.]
  • The evidence which is recorded against an absconded accused can be read when he is apprehended later and tried even if such evidence is not tendered in his presence, on the fulfilment of the above-said conditions.

Supreme Court’s decision in Nirmal Singh v. State of Haryana, (2000) 4 SCC 41 and Jayendra Vishnu v. State of Maharashtra, (2009) 7 SCC 104 were referred.

The above-stated Judgments were referred to as the said decisions provide a very clear picture on the ambit and scope of Section 299 CrPC.

High Court directed the Court below to follow the above guidelines and proceed further immediately to ensure that the accused is committed to the appropriate Court, as expeditiously as possible. [H. Aarun Basha v. State, 2018 SCC OnLine Mad 12845, decided on 19-12-2018]

Advocates who appeared in the instant matter:

For Petitioner: Mr M.Babu Muthu Meeran

For Respondent: Mr M.Mohamed Riyaz, Additional Public Prosecutor

Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

Jammu and Kashmir High Court: Javed Iqbal Wani J., while dismissing the present petition, discusses the ambit and scope of Article 227 of the Constitution and the statutory restriction of filing written statement within a stipulated period as mentioned under Order VIII Rule 1, Code of Civil Procedure.


In the instant petition, Supervisory Jurisdiction of the present Court is invoked by the petitioner for quashing order dated 10-03-2016 (impugned order), passed by the Second Additional District and Sessions Judge, Jammu. In terms of impugned order, the right to file written statement of the defendant petitioner herein is closed by the Trial court after the court notices that the defendant has failed to deposit costs imposed upon him for setting aside ex-parte proceedings initiated by order dated 20-01-2016.


On ambit and scope of Supervisory Jurisdiction under Article 227

Court considered the case of Shalini Shyam Shetty v. Rajendra Shankar Pati, (2010) 8 SCC 329, wherein the Court discussed the scope and ambit of Supervisory Jurisdiction, at length;

“(a) A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is different from a petition under Article 227. The mode of exercise of power by High Court under these two Articles is also different.

 (b) In any event, a petition under Article 227 cannot be called a writ petition. The history of the conferment of writ jurisdiction on High Courts is substantially different from the history of conferment of the power of Superintendence on the High Courts under Article 227.

(c) High Courts cannot, on the drop of a hat, in exercise of its power of superintendence under Article 227 of the Constitution, interfere with the orders of tribunals or Courts inferior to it. Nor can it, in exercise of this power, act as a Court of appeal over the orders of Court or tribunal subordinate to it. In cases where an alternative statutory mode of redressal has been provided, that would also operate as a restrain on the exercise of this power by the High Court.

(d) The parameters of interference by High Courts in exercise of its power of superintendence have been repeatedly laid down by this Court. In this regard the High Court must be guided by the principles laid down by the Constitution Bench of this Court in Waryam Singh and the principles in Waryam Singh have been repeatedly followed by subsequent Constitution Benches and various other decisions of this Court.

(e) According to the ratio in Waryam Singh, followed in subsequent cases, the High Court in exercise of its jurisdiction of superintendence can interfere in order only to keep the tribunals and Courts subordinate to it, `within the bounds of their authority’.

(f) In order to ensure that law is followed by such tribunals and Courts by exercising jurisdiction which is vested in them and by not declining to exercise the jurisdiction which is vested in them.

(g) Apart from the situations pointed in (e) and (f), High Court can interfere in exercise of its power of superintendence when there has been a patent perversity in the orders of tribunals and Courts subordinate to it or where there has been a gross and manifest failure of justice or the basic principles of natural justice have been flouted.

(h) In exercise of its power of superintendence High Court cannot interfere to correct mere errors of law or fact or just because another view than the one taken by the tribunals or Courts subordinate to it, is a possible view. In other words the jurisdiction has to be very sparingly exercised.

(i) High Court’s power of superintendence under Article 227 cannot be curtailed by any statute. It has been declared a part of the basic structure of the Constitution by the Constitution Bench of this Court in the case of L. Chandra Kumar vs. Union of India & others, reported in (1997) 3 SCC 261 and therefore abridgement by a Constitutional amendment is also very doubtful.

(j) It may be true that a statutory amendment of a rather cognate provision, like Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code by the Civil Procedure Code (Amendment) Act, 1999 does not and cannot cut down the ambit of High Court’s power under Article 227. At the same time, it must be remembered that such statutory amendment does not correspondingly expand the High Court’s jurisdiction of superintendence under Article 227.

(k) The power is discretionary and has to be exercised on equitable principle. In an appropriate case, the power can be exercised suo moto.

(l) On a proper appreciation of the wide and unfettered power of the High Court under Article 227, it transpires that the main object of this Article is to keep strict administrative and judicial control by the High Court on the administration of justice within its territory.

(m) The object of superintendence, both administrative and judicial, is to maintain efficiency, smooth and orderly functioning of the entire machinery of justice in such a way as it does not bring it into any disrepute. The power of interference under this Article is to be kept to the minimum to ensure that the wheel of justice does not come to a halt and the fountain of justice remains pure and unpolluted in order to maintain public confidence in the functioning of the tribunals and Courts subordinate to High Court.

(n) This reserve and exceptional power of judicial intervention is not to be exercised just for grant of relief in individual cases but should be directed for promotion of public confidence in the administration of justice in the larger public interest whereas Article 226 is meant for protection of individual grievance. Therefore, the power under Article 227 may be unfettered but its exercise is subject to high degree of judicial discipline pointed out above.

(o) An improper and a frequent exercise of this power will be counter-productive and will divest this extraordinary power of its strength and vitality

The Court further clarified the said premise, citing Radhey Shyam v. Chhabi Nath, (2015) 5 SCC 423, which overruled the decision in Surya Dev Rai v. Ram Chander Rai, (2003) 6 SCC 675; “Accordingly, we answer the question referred as follows: (i) Judicial orders of civil court are not amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution; (ii) Jurisdiction under Article 227 is distinct from jurisdiction under Article 226. Contrary view in Surya Dev Rai is overruled.”

On application of Order VIII Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908

The Court while making an observation over the applicability of Order VIII Rule 1, said, “(…) defendant indisputably has failed to file the written statement within the stipulated period of time prescribed under Order VIII Rule 1 or proviso appended thereto, even  if it is assumed that the summons were served upon him on 11-03-2015 when he appeared before the Trial court notwithstanding the permission granted to the defendant to file the same in terms of order dated 20-01-2016 i.e. when his ex-parte proceedings were set aside by the Trial court. Since the defendant failed to file the written statement within the period prescribed under Order VIII CPC, the closure of right to file the same in terms of impugned order by the Trial court becomes irrelevant and insignificant.”


Reiterating the scope of Supervisory Jurisdiction, the Court dismissed the present petition along with the connected IAs. [Ghulam Mohd. v. Manzoor Ahmed,  2020 SCC OnLine J&K 607, decided on 21-11-2020]

Sakshi Shukla, Editorial Assistant has put this story together

COVID 19Hot Off The PressNews

Suspension of functioning of Delhi High Court and its Subordinate Courts has been extended till 31-07-2020.

Here’s the Court Order:

The Hon’ble Administrative and General Supervision Committee of this Court while considering further extension of suspended functioning of this Court and in view of the prevailing situation of spread of coronavirus (2019-nCOV) pandemic in the NCT of Delhi, in continuation of this Court’s Office orders No.373/Estt./E1/DHC dated 23.03.2020, No.194/RG/DHC/2020 dated 25.03.2020, No.R-43/RG/DHC/2020 dated 15.04.2020, No.R125/RG/DHC/2020 dated 02.05.2020, No.R-201/RG/DHC/2020 dated 16.05.2020, No. R271/RG/DHC/2020 dated 21.05.2020, No.1381/DHC/2020 dated 29.05.2020, No.15/DHC/2020 dated 13.06.2020 and No.21/DHC/2020 dated 29.06.2020 has been pleased to order that the suspended functioning of the High Court of Delhi shall stand extended till 31.07.2020 on the same terms as contained in the Order dated 13.06.2020 of this Court.



Delhi High Court

Notice dt. 14-07-2020

Case BriefsCOVID 19High Courts

Allahabad High Court: A Division Bench of Govind Mathur, CJ and Ramesh Sinha, J., while observing that, though the process of “Unlock” had been started yet movement of ordinary people in several areas is restricted.

Thus Keeping in mind the overall objective conditions, Court issued the following directions:

  • All interim orders passed by the Allahabad High Court well as at Lucknow, all the District Courts, Civil Courts, Family Courts, Labour Courts, Industrial Tribunals and all other Tribunals in the State over which this Court has power of superintendence, which have been expired subsequent to 19th March, 2020 or are due to expire within a period of one month from today, will continue to operate upto 29th June, 2020.  Those interim orders which are not of a limited duration and are to operate till further orders will remain unaffected;
  • If a bail has been granted in anticipation as an interim measure for a specific period and that period is going to expire on or before 10th June, 2020, the same shall stand extended upto 29th June, 2020.
  • If any under trial or juvenile in conflict has been enlarged on bail through a judicial order and the period for such enlargement is going to expire on or before 14th June, 2020, the same shall stand extended upto 29th June, 2020.
  • If any orders of eviction, dispossession or demolition are already passed by the High Court, District or Civil Courts, the same shall remain in abeyance till 29th June, 2020 or having any order order by the court competent, whichever is earlier.

Petition for writ to be listed on 26th June, 2020. [State of U.P.,In Re;  2020 SCC OnLine All 742 ; decided on 08-06-2020]

COVID 19Hot Off The PressNews

Functioning of the High Court of Delhi and its Subordinate Courts shall remain suspended till 14-06-2020.

It has further been ordered that as per earlier directions, all the Benches of the High Court shall take up urgent matters through videoconferencing as per Roster notified on 20.05.2020 and the notes contained therein.

Matters listed in the subordinate courts from 01.06.2020 to 12.06.2’020 be adjourned en bloc and information in this regard be uploaded on District Court website.

To read the detailed notice’s, please follow the link below:

Public Notice 1

Public Notice 2

Delhi High Court

Notice dt. 29-05-2020

Punjab and Haryana High Court
COVID 19Hot Off The PressNews

Summer Vacations in the High Court Punjab and Haryana from 1st June to 26th June stands cancelled and Court will continue to function.

Summer Vacations in the Subordinate Courts also stands cancelled.

Please follow the link to read the notification:


Punjab and Haryana High Court

[Notification dt. 23-05-2020]

COVID 19Hot Off The PressNews

Pursuant to Order No.40-3/2020-DM-1(A) dated 14.04.2020 issued by the Government of India regarding continuance of lockdown upto 03.05.2020 and in continuation of this Court’s Office orders No.373/Estt./E1/DHC dated 23.03.2020 and No.194/RG/DHC/2020 dated 25.03.2020, Hon’ble the Administrative and General Supervision Committee of this Court has been pleased to order that the functioning of the High Court of Delhi shall continue to remain suspended till 03.05.2020 on same terms.

The arrangements qua mentioning and hearing of urgent matters by this Court through videoconferencing shall continue as before. However, the number of Benches, hearing matters through videoconferencing, would be increased further.

To read the detailed Orders , follow the link below:

Delhi High Court

[Office Order dt. 15-04-2020]

COVID 19Hot Off The PressNews

Andhra Pradesh High Court issues guidelines for hearing of cases through video conferencing during lockdown period in the Subordinate Courts

Following are the guidelines:

  • All the Subordinate Courts shall ensure that the measures have been taken to reduce the need for the physical presence within Court premises and to secure the functioning of the Courts in consonance with social distancing guidelines and best public health practices shall be deemed to be lawful.
  • All the Subordinate Courts shall ensure that the urgent cases are heard by adopting the mode of video conferencing through a convenient video conferencing app/software.
  • The Subordinate Courts can proceed with pronouncement of judgments/orders in Civil cases by issuing notices to both the counsels through whatsapp, e-mail and also by uploading the notice in the official website of District Court under the caption ‘NOTICE’.
  • The facility of video conferencing for the stakeholders including legal aid counsel is to be provided for participating in hearing of the cases through video conferencing, if they are not having such facility. The concerned District Legal Services Authority or Mandal Legal Services Committee shall take care of arrangement of such facility, if they are approached by the stakeholders.
  • All the Judicial Officers shall note that since the High Court is in the process of framing transitional guidelines for e-filing and video conferencing, the video conferencing shall be mainly employed for hearing arguments whether at trial stage or appellate stage.
  • The trial Courts shall record evidence in urgent cases through Video conferencing only, with consent of both the parties.

To read the detailed guidelines, please follow the link:


Andhra Pradesh High Court

[Notification dt. 08-04-2020]

Telangana High Court
COVID 19Hot Off The PressNews

Considering the fact that the lockdown may be lifted in a phased manner and 100% opening of the courts may lead to congregation of the people in the court premises, the Full Court has resolved to continue the present arrangement with regard to the functioning of the High Court and the District Courts till April 30, 2020.

At the High Court level only extreme urgent matters namely Bail applications, stay applications fresh admissions such as PILs will be taken up.

At the District Courts level, extremely urgent criminal and civil matters such as bail applications, remand, extension of remand, interim injunctions etc. will be entertained.

The situation will be reviewed on April 25, 2020. It is also resolved to cancel the Summer Vacation both for the High Court as well as the Subordinate Courts and all the courts in the State shall continue to function throughout May 2020 till 5th June, 2020.

COVID 19Hot Off The PressNews

Having considered the steps already taken by this Court to combat the impending threat of coronavirus (2019-nCOV) and considering the prevalent situation, particularly in view of the lockdown declared by the Government in the National Capital Territory of Delhi upto 31.03.2020 and in view of request of Bar Associations for complete closure of the Courts, in supersession of earlier notifications in this regard, the Administrative and General Supervision Committee of this Court has resolved as under:­

i. The functioning of this Court  as well the Courts subordinate thereto is hereby. suspended till 04.04.2020.

ii. In case of any fresh matter of extreme urgency, the Registrar/Joint Registrar (Filing) and Registrar/Joint Registrar (Original) of this Court be contacted telephonically. Hearing of such matter would be through video conference.

iii. As regards the Courts subordinate to the High Court,  the following directions are issued, which shall come into effect immediately:

(a) The respective District and Sessions Judges shall prepare a roster of Judicial Officers for dealing with remand related to fresh arrests. For fresh matters of extreme urgency, one Administrative Officer (Judicial) be nominated in each District who can be contacted telephonically by the Advocate/party. Necessary directions be issued and uploaded on the website by the concerned District & Sessions Judges.

(b) The matters which are already fixed upto 04.04.2020, be adjourned en-bloc to subsequent dates and the information in this regard be uploaded on the website of the District and entered into CIS so that auto generated messages are received by a” concerned.

(c) The concerned District and Sessions Judges shall ensure that in view’ of the above directions, only those staff officials, who are residing in Delhi and are using own conveyance, are called for handling indispensable services, as aforesaid. However, as already directed, all those staff officials, who are not required to report for duty on any given day, would not leave the station under any circumstance. They would always be available on call and would be deemed to be on duty. In case of any urgency, District and Sessions Judge may call upon them to report back for duty immediately. Record with respect to roster of all such court staff officials shall be maintained by each district.

(d) Delhi Judicial Academy shall suspend all its training programmes and court attachments till 04.04.2020.

iv. ‘Lockdown/suspension of work’ of Courts shall be treated as “closure” within the meaning of the Explanation appended to Section 4 of the Limitation Act, 1963 and other enabling provisions of the Act and other Statutes, as may be applicable to court proceedings. Thus, limitation for any court proceeding shall not run w.eJ. 23.03.2020 till 04.04.2020 subject to further orders.

v. All Court rooms and other parts of the court complex (including lawyers chambers) of the High Court and Courts subordinate thereto would remain closed except those which are required to be opened in connection with the directions as given hereinabove.

Delhi High Court

[Office Order dt. 23-03-2020]

COVID 19Hot Off The PressNews

In order to have effective control and containment over spread of Novel Corona Virus (COVID-19), the following instructions are issued to be observed in the premises of all the subordinate courts of Rajasthan:-

  1. Public gatherings in the premises of all the subordinate courts be avoided as far as possible. No function or other event of mass gathering shall be permitted in the court premises.
  2. The subordinate courts should not insist on the presence of the parties unless it is very essential and unavoidable. The requests for personal exemption of accused/complainant witnesses/parties be accordingly considered and adverse orders may be avoided for their absence.
  3. As far as possible, remand of all the prisoners be given only through video conferencing and overcrowding in the lockup be avoided.
  4. Mediation proceedings be held only in urgent matters.
  5. All the learned members of Bar be requested to advise their clients not to visit the court premises unless it is very essential and unavoidable.
  6. In all the court rooms and offices, chairs, tables, gates, railings and other things be disinfected regularly at least twice a day by mopping through 1% hypochlorite.
  7. The State Government has appointed Nodal Officers in each District for effective control over spread of Corona Virus. In coordination with these Nodal officers, paramedical personnel be deployed in all the court complexes for primary medical check-up of the entrants of court premises so that appropriate steps for suspected infectants may be timely taken up.

    8. Court staff suffering from cold/cough or sneezing would be instructed to strictly follow the medical advice.

  9. All concerned shall also ensure the preventive and remedial measures as instructed or advised by the Central/State Governments and other competent authorities from time to time.

This Circular shall remain in force till further orders.

Rajasthan High Court

[Circular dt. 15-03-2020]