Madras High Court asks trial courts not to insist on certified copies of judgments

Madras High Court asks trial courts not to insist on certified copies of judgments

The observation was made while pronouncing the order on an appeal filed by a lawyer, arrested by the National Investigating Agency

The Madras High Court has stated that trial courts should not insist on certified copies of the orders and judgments of the high courts. That’s because the orders downloaded from the court’s official website carried the same sanctity as certified copies.

A bench of Justice M Sundar and Justice R Sakthivel said they did not see a reason for judicial officers to insist on certified copies when lawyers submitted downloaded copies from the website to save time and avoid inconvenience to clients.

The Judge stressed, “It is high time we make use of the technology. Certified copies and copies downloaded from our website are the same. What is the difference? I am only saying this because it will save time. For example, tomorrow, if you were to require an order copy in a case of emergency where one was to be taken into police custody immediately, what will you do?”

The observations were made while pronouncing the order on an appeal filed by Mohammed Abbas, a Madurai-based lawyer. In May last, he was arrested by the National Investigating Agency (NIA) on charges of his association with the banned Popular Front of India.

On being granted bail, Abbas’ lawyer, advocate R Vivekananthan requested the bench to add a direction in its order. He requested the special NIA court to accept the downloaded order copy for releasing his client on bail. The advocate said waiting for the certified copy was likely to take time, which could mean that Abbas would have to stay in prison until the availability of the certified copy.

The Court expressed surprise and said it didn’t think a written direction was required.

On the advocate’s insistence, the bench asked the other members of the Bar present in the court about their experiences in the matter.

At this, the additional public prosecutor E Raj Thilak, the NIA special public prosecutor N Baskaran, and advocate M Velmurugan said that while some judicial officers accepted downloaded copies, most insisted on certified copies.

Thereafter, the Judges directed Raj Thilak to ensure that in Abbas’ case also the special court accepted the downloaded copy.

It orally directed the additional Public Prosecutors and other prosecutors to ensure that in all cases, downloaded order copies were accepted by trial courts.

The bench held, “The High Court has said many times earlier too that if a downloaded order copy has been attested by a lawyer, then there should not be any problem in accepting it. Please ensure there is no problem.”