The Madras High Court on Wednesday ushered in a groundbreaking era for legal proceedings involving incarcerated individuals. In a decision that marks a significant shift in how courts handle appeals from convicts, the court granted permission to R. Subramanian, a convict, to argue his own case through video conferencing. Madras High Court Makes Landmark Decision: Convict to Argue Case Through Video Conference A Desire for Self-Representation In November 2023, Subramanian, former promoter of several financial institutions, got convicted. He received a 20-year imprisonment term for an economic offence. Despite this, he filed a writ petition. He wanted to actively engage in his legal proceedings. Consequently, this petition, heard by a bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjay V. Gangapurwala and Justice D. Bharatha Chakravarthy, presented a compelling argument for allowing Subramanian to argue his appeals without the need for physical presence in court (Convict to Argue Case). The petition stemmed from Subramanian’s wish to represent himself in some of his pending cases before the High Court. This request highlighted a growing trend of convicts seeking a more active role in their legal battles. A Balanced Approach While acknowledging the merits of Subramanian’s petition, the court recognized the need for a nuanced approach. Chief Justice Gangapurwala emphasized the importance of considering the specifics of each case. A blanket order granting Subramanian permission to argue all his cases without a lawyer wouldn’t be prudent, he explained. To ensure a balanced and well-informed decision, the court directed Subramanian’s counsel to submit a comprehensive list of […]
News Tags: What are the precedents for allowing convicts to argue cases remotely in Indian courts?
1 post
