Supreme Court Mandates Hybrid Hearings for State Information Commissions: A Step Towards Digital Access to Justice.
Kishan Chand Jain v. Union of India & Ors.
Case No.: Writ Petition No. 360 of 2021.
Court: Supreme Court of India.
Date: October 09, 2023.
Quorum: Hon’ble CJI. D. Y. Chandrachud, J. J.B. Pardiwala, J. Manoj Mishra.
Facts of the Case:
In 2021, Kishan Chand Jain filed a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution seeking directions for better functioning of State Information Commissions (SICs) under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005. The petitioner argued that most SICs are located in state capitals and conduct only physical hearings, imposing prohibitive costs on applicants from remote areas.
Legal Issues:
- Whether SICs should provide virtual hearing options alongside physical hearings?
- Whether SICs should implement online filing systems for RTI appeals and complaints?
- Whether the current functioning of SICs aligns with the objectives of the RTI Act?
Legal Provisions:
Right to Information Act, 2005.
Section 15: Constitution of State Information Commissions.
Section 18: Powers and functions of Information Commissions.
Section 19: Appeal procedure.
Section 26: Development of programs by appropriate Government.
Arguments of the Petitioner
The learned counsel for petitioners aregued that virtual hearings would provide cost-effective access to information for applicants. Most SICs lack online filing facilities for RTI appeals and complaints, unlike the Central Information Commission (CIC). SICs should adopt user-friendly digital portals to enhance their effectiveness.
Arguments of the Respondents
The leraned counsel for respondents aregued that the responses varied among different state SICs. Some states (e.g., Himachal Pradesh, Karnataka, Haryana) had already adopted hybrid modes of hearing. Others (e.g., Sikkim, Goa) had not implemented virtual hearings. Some states (e.g., Uttar Pradesh) were not opposed to virtual hearings but had not yet implemented them.
Judgment and analysis
The Supreme Court issued the certain directives. All SICs must provide hybrid modes of hearing for complaints and appeals by December 31, 2023. SICs must implement e-filing systems for complaints and appeals by December 31, 2023. Central and State Ministries must compile email addresses of Public Information Officers within one month. The Department of Personnel and Training must convene a meeting of all Central and State Information Commissioners within one month to establish implementation modalities. State Governments must provide necessary funds for setting up virtual hearing infrastructure.
The judgment recognizes the right to information as a constitutional right, intertwined with Articles 14, 19(1)(a), and 21. It emphasizes that access to Information Commissions is crucial for securing this right. The Court’s decision aligns with the broader push for digital access to justice, acknowledging that technology can democratize legal processes and expand access beyond physical limitations.
The directive for hybrid hearings and e-filing systems is a significant step towards making the RTI process more accessible and efficient. It addresses the geographical and financial barriers that often hinder citizens from remote areas from fully utilizing the RTI Act. However, the effectiveness of this judgment will depend on its implementation. Factors such as digital literacy, internet connectivity in remote areas, and the adaptability of SICs to new technologies will play crucial roles in realizing the intended benefits.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s judgment in Kishan Chand Jain v. Union of India marks a progressive step towards digitizing and democratizing access to information. By mandating hybrid hearings and e-filing systems, the Court has attempted to bridge the gap between citizens and Information Commissions. This decision has the potential to significantly enhance the efficacy of the RTI Act, provided it is implemented effectively and uniformly across all states. As we move forward, it will be crucial to monitor the implementation of these directives and their impact on citizens’ ability to exercise their right to information.
Reviewed by Maria Therese Syriac.
PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.