Meghalaya HC takes measures to prevent any miscarriage of justice due to lockdown

Syllad | The Rising MeghalayaMarch 27, 2020

 The Meghalaya High Court has decided to take extraordinary measures to ensure the smooth administration of justice and prevent any miscarriage of justice in view of the nationwide lockdown due to the COVID-19 outbreak.

“Against this backdrop, the Bench of two Judges of this Court is constituted with a view of ensuring that litigants should not suffer on account of their inability to approach the Courts of law, and are not deprived of the benefits of the interim orders granted by the High Court, subordinate Courts, District Council Courts or the tribunals, as the case may be,” Justice HS Thangkhiew and Justice W Diengdoh said in their order passed here on Friday.

The bench said in view of the COVID-19 outbreak and the nationwide consequential lockdown now declared until April 14, normal working of this Court, including all subordinate Courts, District Council Courts and Tribunals, under the superintendence of the High Court, at least till then is not possible.

It also added that it may not be out of place to mention that such stringent measures as imposed will make it difficult for citizens to approach Courts of law to take recourse to legal remedies.

There may have been many cases in the High Court, as well as in the subordinate Courts, District Council Courts and Tribunals, with limited interim orders operating as on March 20.

There is every likelihood that some of these interim orders, that were not made until further orders, may be expiring on March 20, or even, thereafter, being limited in nature.

“Accordingly, in exercise of the powers under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with sections 482 and 483 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, keeping in view the extraordinary situation which has arisen in this regard, it appears appropriate to undertake extraordinary measures by way of issuing certain directions in order to ensure the smooth administration of justice and prevent any miscarriage of justice,” it said.

The bench said all interim orders/directions, including any order requiring compliance by the parties to such proceedings, passed by the High Court, including all the subordinate Courts, District Council Courts and all other Tribunals in the state, over which this Court has power of superintendence, that were subsisting as on March, may stand extended till April 30, unless vacated or modified earlier or until further orders of the Court, unless specifically dealt with by any judicial order to the contrary.

“We, however, make it clear that those interim orders/ directions which are not of a limited duration and are to operate until further orders will remain unaffected,” the two Judges said.

The bench also directed that all orders passed by the Courts exercising criminal jurisdiction having granted bail or anticipatory bail, parole etc., for a limited period which are likely to expire on or before April 30, shall stand extended till April 30, subject to any orders passed by the said forums even before the said expiry date or, thereafter, to enable the respective Courts to deal with any abuse of the orders of the concerned party.

The aforesaid directions may be subject to any orders to the contrary having been passed by the Supreme Court of India in any particular matter.

“That if the Government of Meghalaya and/ or any of its departments and/ or functionaries, Central Government and/ or its departments or functionaries or any public sector undertaking or any public or private company or any firm or any individual or person is/ are, by order of this Court or any Court subordinate to it or any District Council Court, required to do a particular thing or carry out certain direction in a particular manner in a time frame which is going to expire at any time before April 14, such time shall stand extended upto April 30,” it said.

The bench further stated that it can also be clarified that in case the extension of the interim orders causes undue hardship of any extreme nature to any of the parties to such proceedings or a matter of extreme urgency being indicated by the State or its authorities, they would be at liberty to seek appropriate relief as may be advised.