- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Artificial Intelligence
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- Environmental, Social, and Governance
- Foreign Direct Investment
- Food and Beverage
- Gaming
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- In Focus
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- IP & Tech Era
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Student Corner
- Take On Board
- Tax
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Viewpoint
- Zoom In
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- Middle East
- Africa
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Artificial Intelligence
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- Environmental, Social, and Governance
- Foreign Direct Investment
- Food and Beverage
- Gaming
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- In Focus
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- IP & Tech Era
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Student Corner
- Take On Board
- Tax
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Viewpoint
- Zoom In
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- Middle East
- Africa
Seven-Judge committee of SC to decide on resumption of physical hearings after 4 weeks
The Supreme Court on July 22 said that a seven-judge committee will take a call on reopening of regular court functioning after 4 weeks, and ruled out the possibility of any physical hearings now in the backdrop of the Covid-19 pandemic.A bench of Chief Justice S A Bobde and comprising Justices A S Bopanna and V Ramasubramanian said that the seven-judge committee of the Supreme Court headed...
ToRead the Full Story, Subscribe to 
Access the exclusive LEGAL ERAStories,Editorial and Expert Opinion

The Supreme Court on July 22 said that a seven-judge committee will take a call on reopening of regular court functioning after 4 weeks, and ruled out the possibility of any physical hearings now in the backdrop of the Covid-19 pandemic.
A bench of Chief Justice S A Bobde and comprising Justices A S Bopanna and V Ramasubramanian said that the seven-judge committee of the Supreme Court headed by Justice N V Ramana would consider after four weeks the possibility of resumption of physical hearings in the apex court. Since March 25, the Supreme Court has been taking up matters through video conferencing due to the nationwide lockdown to contain the spread of Covid-19.
The Court decided to continue to take up matters through video conferencing after restrictions were lifted. The remarks from the Chief Justice came during the hearing of promotion of SC/ST employees’ matter, where counsel insisted on resumption of physical courts to deal with a large batch of petitions. The Top Court said the seven-judge committee would examine the issue and then decide what kind of hearings on the cases could happen.
In June, lawyers’ bodies demanded resumption of regular courtroom hearings, but the apex court committee did not agree. The Supreme Court committee said that it will review the situation later bearing in mind the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic situation. Considering the representations from lawyers’ bodies, the apex court had said that it is not inclined to resume physical courtroom hearings on the cases till June end. The Supreme Court Bar Association, favouring physical court hearings, had said that administration of justice cannot remain virtually closed for an indefinite period.


