The Bombay High Court has informed the state that video-conferencing facility cannot be considered as a substitute for producing an accused person on scheduled dates before the trial court .
The court recommended that the government shift some of the policemen deployed to protect VIPs towards the task of escorting undertrials to courts.
The division bench comprising Justice SC Dharmadhikari and Justice Bharati Dangre has stated that the availability of video-conferencing facilities at courts or jails does not imply that the accused need not be produced on scheduled dates before the trial courts.
The court made the remark while hearing a set of petitions, which includes a suo-motu public interest litigation, that has raised the issue of needless delays in trials as a result of the accused not being produced on scheduled dates in appropriate courts.
Lawyer Niteen Pradhan, assisting as an amicus curiae, noted that the government had installed video conferencing facilities at around 110 jails and 518 courts.
