Examine how digital infrastructure (e-filing, virtual hearings) can be leveraged to strengthen emergency access to justice without compromising judicial discipline.

Q. Examine how digital infrastructure (e-filing, virtual hearings) can be leveraged to strengthen emergency access to justice without compromising judicial discipline. (15 marks, 250-350 words)

Article 21 protects life and personal liberty at every hour, yet judicial remedies have long been tied to court calendars. Digital infrastructure can dissolve these temporal limits — provided widened access does not dilute procedural rigour.

The gap emergency access must fill

• Executive actions affecting liberty — late-night arrests, early-morning demolitions, weekend deportations — occur outside working hours, when physical filing counters are shut.
• The issue was tested in 2026, when the Supreme Court examined a plea for a Standard Operating Procedure on urgent after-hours listing and declined it, holding that a litigant apprehending imminent violation of liberty "is not required to physically approach a courtroom" because digital filing already permits round-the-clock access [1].

How digital infrastructure strengthens access

• 24x7 e-filing decouples institution of a case from court timings; eCourts Phase III (2023–27) targets digital and paperless courts and full digitisation of records, removing the physical file as a bottleneck [2].
• Video conferencing enables a judge, counsel and detenu to convene from any location; the e-Committee's Model Rules for Video Conferencing for Courts permit VC at all stages of judicial proceedings [3].
• VC links to jails and hospitals under Phase III make custodial and medical emergencies judicially reachable [2].
• e-Sewa Kendras extend these facilities to litigants lacking devices or connectivity, addressing the digital divide [2].

Safeguards preserving judicial discipline

• Strict gatekeeping: an emergency channel confined to genuine threats to life and liberty prevents its use for ordinary or tactical listings.
• Codified procedure: the Model VC Rules already prescribe decorum, recording and contempt safeguards, ensuring virtual sittings retain courtroom solemnity [3].
• Transparency: live-streaming rules and the National Judicial Data Grid, which publishes near-real-time pendency and disposal data, allow public scrutiny of how urgent listings are used [4][5].

Technology should therefore extend the court's reach, not relax its rigour. A calibrated, rule-bound emergency e-listing protocol — built on existing Phase III capacity and monitored through NJDG — would make constitutional protection continuously available, advancing SDG-16's promise of access to justice for all.

(~330 words)

Sources: 1. Supreme Court of India — official judgments portal — 2026 order declining a plea for an after-hours urgent-listing SOP, holding e-filing enables anytime access 2. eCourts Project Phase III, Department of Justice — digital and paperless courts, record digitisation, VC links to jails/hospitals, e-Sewa Kendras 3. Model Rules for Video Conferencing for Courts, e-Committee, Supreme Court of India — VC permitted at all stages of proceedings; decorum and procedural safeguards 4. PIB — e-Committee releases Draft Model Rules for Live-Streaming and Recording of Court Proceedings — transparency framework for virtual proceedings 5. National Judicial Data Grid, eCourts — near-real-time public data on pendency and disposal