Calcutta HC On June 11, Issues Stringent Guidelines for Functioning Of Court

Must Read

Madras High Court Observes Unexplained Delay in Procedural Safeguards, Quashes Detention Through Writ Petition

A Writ Petition was filed under Article 226 to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus. The petitioner P. Lakshmi,...

UK Court of Appeal Rules Home Department’s Deportation Policy of Immigrants Unlawful

Britain’s Court of Appeal quashed the Home Department’s deportation policy, declaring it unlawful; criticizing it for being too stringent...

Inordinate and Unexplained Delay in Considering Representation by Government Renders Detention Order Illegal: Madras High Court

A Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution was filed in the Madras High Court to declare the detention...

Privy Council Clarifies Approach To Winding up in “Deadlock” Cases in the Case of Chu v. Lau

The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council clarified several aspects of the law concerning just and equitable winding-up petitions,...

Madras High Court Directs Hospital To Submit Necessary Medical Reports to Authorization Committee for Approval of Kidney Transplant

A Writ Petition was filed under Article 226 to issue a Writ of Mandamus to K.G. Hospital, Coimbatore by...

Punjab Woman Evokes Petition for Protection Fearing Honour Killing

In the case of Divya Mattu and another vs State of Punjab and others, the petitioner, Divya, fearing honour...

Follow us

Keeping in mind the aftermath of COVID-19, the lockdown, and the cyclone, the Calcutta High Court issued a notification on June 5th, 2020 regarding its functioning.

June 11th, 2020 is when normal functioning of the High Court resumed. Hygiene and social distancing are a priority. Hence the hearings will be on a small scale. The ranking of the matters scheduled for hearings will be in terms of urgency. The Court has decided to hear bail matters through Video Conferencing. The idea is to start with Thursday’s followed by Monday, Wednesday, and Friday from June 15th 2020.

A particular set of matters for the day indicates the Bench of every Courtroom. The aim is to complete the set before the end of the day. If the hearing of any issue faces delay, a new date will be decided. The revised allocation is to avoid spillover of cases and limit the number of lawyers in Court.

The Courtroom is open for three court staff other than the Judges on the Bench. A Courtroom will not allow more than eight litigants and lawyers. If there is a need for more lawyers for any particular matter, a separate allocation is required. The Registrar of the Court is to divide such cases only when the numbers of lawyers in the courtroom are less than eight.

Upholding strict social distancing measure is of utmost importance. These measures include a two-minute gap when there is a completion of a matter and beginning of a new issue. The Bar council rooms and the library need to have only 25% of the staff.

The notification restricts the number of people allowed in the lift by limiting it to three. The canteen services remain suspended for the time being. If they don’t have pending matters Lawyers are to stay home, as per the advice. The Principle bench will hear cases about Port Blair. The virtual or physical form depends on the urgency of the case. 11:00 am to 1:00 pm, and 2 pm to 4 pm are the time slots for the Court’s working. The notification further mentioned instructions about attire, filing of matters, etc.

The notification is extensive and drafted, keeping the necessary safety norms in mind.


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgements from the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe for our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

 

Latest News

Madras High Court Observes Unexplained Delay in Procedural Safeguards, Quashes Detention Through Writ Petition

A Writ Petition was filed under Article 226 to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus. The petitioner P. Lakshmi, called for records of the...

UK Court of Appeal Rules Home Department’s Deportation Policy of Immigrants Unlawful

Britain’s Court of Appeal quashed the Home Department’s deportation policy, declaring it unlawful; criticizing it for being too stringent on immigrants to comply with. Background The...

Inordinate and Unexplained Delay in Considering Representation by Government Renders Detention Order Illegal: Madras High Court

A Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution was filed in the Madras High Court to declare the detention order of the husband of...

Privy Council Clarifies Approach To Winding up in “Deadlock” Cases in the Case of Chu v. Lau

The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council clarified several aspects of the law concerning just and equitable winding-up petitions, as well as shareholder disputes...

Madras High Court Directs Hospital To Submit Necessary Medical Reports to Authorization Committee for Approval of Kidney Transplant

A Writ Petition was filed under Article 226 to issue a Writ of Mandamus to K.G. Hospital, Coimbatore by P. Sankar & V. Sobana....

Punjab Woman Evokes Petition for Protection Fearing Honour Killing

In the case of Divya Mattu and another vs State of Punjab and others, the petitioner, Divya, fearing honour killing against her by her...

Punjab Woman Accuses Punjab Police of Keeping Husband in Illegal Custody and Framing Him in a False Case

In the case of Geeta v the State of Punjab, the petitioner evoked a writ petition of habeas corpus as she claimed that her...

Addition of Words as Prefixes or Suffixes Is an Infringement of a Registered Trademark: Delhi High Court

Justice Jayanth Nath allowed the Times Group to use its registered trademark “Newshour”, in the case of Bennett Coleman and Co. Ltd v. ARG Outlier...

Just Because the Deceased Did Not Have License, Does Not Imply He Was Negligent: Chhattisgarh High Court

In the case of Hemlal & Others v. Dayaram & Others, a Single Bench of Chhattisgarh High Court consisting of Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal annunciated various...

Hoardings Are Movable Property Under Section 2(3) of DMC Act Subject To the Twin Test: Delhi High Court

Delhi High Court in the case of Delhi International Airport v South Delhi Metropolitan Corporation discussed in detail the provision under Section 2(3) of the DMC...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -