General

________________________________________________________________________________

This Blog is written by Akshat Srivastava from Amity Law School, Noida. Edited by Ravikiran Shukre.

________________________________________________________________________________

INTRODUCTION:

The first case of COVID-19 virus infection was reported in Wuhan, China in the month of October 2019. It is the deadliest virus that causes various kinds of diseases like heart failure, coronary artery disease, cancer, high blood pressure, flu, etc. It is highly contiguous. Since it was a new virus no medicine was available for its cure. So, in order to fight against Coronavirus, the government had decided to put lockdowns in all the cities. As lockdown started many offices, educational institutes, colleges, courts, and businesses have to shut down. As lockdown came all the courts and law offices have to shut down, so all the judicial activities got jeopardized and many law firms suffered heavy financial loss. In order to start judicial activities in our country, the online e-judiciary system strengthened and started in a very short span.

This article covers the situation in COVID-19, and how the court organizations responded to difficulties faced during the COVID-19 pandemic and also discusses the benefits of the e- judiciary. This article also throws light on the provisions made in our judicial system to fight the war with the COVID-19 pandemic.

IMPACT:

1. Thousands of people died all over the world due to a going pandemic.

2. Corona Virus has caused destabilization of the world economy. As a result, many individuals have suffered from losses like unemployment, loss of earnings etc.

3. During a lockdown when many offices, education institutions, and schools are shut down the new concept of working from home immersed with the support of new software.

4. Online teaching methods are started to continue the academic process.

5. The judiciary of our country also introduced online filing and online hearings of cases.

PROVISIONS IN THE LEGISLATURE:

New Zealand: 

New Zealand is one of the countries which is fighting against COVID-19. The Health Act 1965, gave a wide range of powers to the Minister of Health, the director-general, and medical officers are directed to deal with the Covid 19 crisis.

COVID-19 Public Health Response Act, 2020 was also passed which spreads out another construction of arrangements to react to the ongoing situation. All the demonstrations held canceled after the enactment of this law except if it is proceeded by the movement of the house.

USA:

In the USA four kinds of eminent legislation were taken in four different phases which are Phase 1, Phase 2, Phase 3, and Phase 3.5.

1) In Phase 1 The Covid Preparedness and Response Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2020″ [7] was brought into impact. This demonstration specifies that financing would stay available for a long-term period. This Act sanctions 8.3 billion dollars for different government offices as crisis subsidizing to address the difficulties of Covid flare-up.

2) In Phase 2  Families First Coronavirus Response Act [8] was enacted. This act was functional from 1^st April 2020 to 31^st December 2020. This act deals with testing of the people, protecting health workers, and providing benefits to children and families.

3) In Phase 3 the coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act were enacted. This act specifies that payment should be made in different things like household, cargo, Airlines, health institutions, and hospitals. The payment should be made to the State and Central Government. The main aspect of this act is the Paycheck protection program.

4) In Phase 3.5 Paycheck Protection Program and Health Care Enhancement Act was enacted. The bill that arrived supports the bundle of 484 billion dollars as extra financing to improve and uphold the vital highlights of the CARES Act.

India:

COVID-19 is the main pandemic that is dealt with by legitimate foundations of the country. Three principle enactments like Disaster Management Act (2005), Epidemic Diseases Act (1897), and India Penal Code (1860) were made usable to address the difficulties faced by COVID-19. The central government had the ability to give bearings to any authority in India. A National wide lockdown was forced under the Disaster Management Act to guarantee social removing to forestall the spread of Covid. It gives the meaning of natural catastrophe as situations that include sickness, incapacity, or passing for a huge scope among people, creatures, and plants because of poisons or infection brought about by living beings or their items [24]. The arrangement specifies that accessibility of food, clean water, least norms of cleanliness, and sterilization would be ensured and uncommon accentuation would be laid on weakest gatherings to empower and free them to react and recuperate from the impacts of the natural fiasco.

CASE ANALYSIS:

State of Maharashtra v. Prafulla Desai:

In this case, it was said that with the help of video conferencing the recorded evidences are given. The giving of recorded evidence with the help of video conferencing is considered the procedure of law. Several subordinate courts have also made guidelines of judicial proceedings through video conferencing.

Anita Kushwaha v. Pushap Sudan:

In this case, the Constitution Bench of the Honorable Supreme Court of India described access justice which have constituted the following elements:

1. The state must provide an adjudicatory mechanism

2. The mechanism should be accessible in terms of distance.

3. The process of adjudication must be speedy

4. The litigant’s access to the adjudication process must be affordable.

Youth Bar Association of India v. Union of India:

In this case, the uploaded copy of FIR reports which were present on the websites of police was linked to the e-filing process to check the electronic availability of FIR in courts. Also, there was the need for the Supreme Court Mobile App which has lots of information about the case.

CONCLUSION:

After the Lockdown Period, the Covid-19 pandemic had brought up an uncommon change in the method of court degrees at all degrees of legal executives. In the form of virtual hearings, there is the transfer of E-Courts to E Judiciary.

The COVID-19 virus is showing long term after-effects as well, and Long-Corona cases too are emerging, plus new strains/variants of the COVID-19 virus are making their appearance every now and then, like in the United Kingdom, South Africa, Brazil, and so on, and the virus still continues to pose a dreadful potential global threat.

Under the circumstances, whether these will become a permanent “new normal” in the court administration system of the country in times to come, is also difficult to predict. Nevertheless, this is an important aspect that would be the subject matter of future quantitative legal studies, after the ongoing COVID-19 crisis dust settles down.

REFERENCES:

(1) iacajournal.org/articles/10.36745/ijca.391/

(2) mondaq.com

(3) ibanet.org

(4) iblog pleaders