After a counsel, during the course of the hearing on a petition that challenged a trial court order, made a submission that he could not argue the case elaborately before the trial court in the physical mode, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court observed that during COVID-19 pandemic, the entire country was working virtually.
The court was hearing the petition filed by A. Lakshmanan of Tirunelveli, who was accused in a corruption case. An application filed before a trial court hearing cases under the Prevention of Corruption Act seeking an order to produce documents in the case was dismissed. Challenging the order, the present petition was filed before the High Court.
Justice K. Murali Shankar observed that during COVID-19 pandemic, the entire country was working virtually. Since the petitioner had not raised any objection before the trial court, he should not take such a stand before the High Court.
The Supreme Court had permitted virtual hearing and the High Court had issued various circulars to conduct the cases virtually in view of the pandemic. The complaint that the petitioner was not given an opportunity to argue the case elaborately physically was very much against the orders of the Supreme Court and the High Court, the judge said.
Moreover, it was high time for the stakeholders of the judiciary to refrain from making allegations or levelling baseless charges against judicial officers, the judge said.
More importantly, since the bar and the bench were the two sides of the same coin, the bar must discourage clients and litigants from raising baseless allegations and advocates must desist from incorporating the same in their pleadings, the judge said. The court dismissed the petition that challenged the order of the trial court as devoid of merits.
