Gujarat HC directs NCLT Ahmedabad: Allow electronic devices

In a landmark ruling, the Gujarat High Court has permitted the use of electronic gadgets, including mobile phones, tablets, and laptops, during court hearings and proceedings. This decision, directed at the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) Ahmedabad Bench, comes in response to a writ petition in the case of Nipun Praveen Singhvi vs. National Company Law Tribunal.

Justice Vaibhavi D. Nanavati, presiding over the bench, stated that the complete prohibition of electronic devices in the courtroom was unjustified. However, she noted that the NCLT retains the authority to impose reasonable restrictions on the use of such devices during hearings. This move by the Gujarat High Court aims to harness technological advancements to streamline litigation processes for both advocates and judges.

Court Emphasizes Modernization of Court Proceedings with Digital Tools

The writ petition emerged from guidelines previously issued by the NCLT, which barred the use of mobile phones, laptops, and other electronic devices inside the courtroom. The petitioner, aggrieved by these restrictions, argued that they hindered legal professionals from effectively presenting their cases. He maintained that these devices are essential for legal research and documentation, and their prohibition would adversely affect the functioning of advocates.

In its decision, the High Court drew on principles established by the Supreme Court of India in the case of Sarvesh Mathur vs. the Registrar General. The court recognized the petitioner's arguments, subsequently directing the NCLT's Ahmedabad branch to permit the use of electronic gadgets during proceedings.

This interim order represents a significant step towards modernizing procedural laws and enhancing the efficiency and accessibility of the Indian Judiciary. It acknowledges the evolving needs of the legal profession in incorporating technology.

The court has scheduled a further hearing on February 23, 2024, to deliberate on the interim order, demonstrating a commitment to balancing technological advancement with a fair legal process. This ruling underscores the necessity of adapting legal frameworks to leverage technology effectively in the legal field.