Should COVID testing be mandatory for lawyers visiting the courts? Opinions divided over testing

Recently 44 court staffers of the Supreme Court testing positive for COVID-19. With the surge in cases in the city, courts in Mumbai have become cautious too with a recent meeting of sessions court judges passing a resolution to get a drive for rapid antigen testing arranged for its staff. While the need for inoculation cannot be challenged, the current need for the courts is to make testing for lawyers and court staff at the lower court’s mandatory, say lawyers. But a section of lawyers expressed their apprehension of having a mandatory test.

With the surge in COVID19 cases in the city, late last month the BMC started rapid antigen testing at the session court entry. But the mandatory testing was restricted only to litigants. Advocates including prosecutors as well as court staff did not have to get tested. They could enter the court through a separate entry gate. The resolutions passed in the meeting have now restricted entry of litigants to those whose matters are listed for final judgment, etc.

On April 6, a sessions court committee comprising of 4 sessions court judge had passed resolutions in view of the surge, among which was one for the registrar to arrange a rapid antigen testing drive for all the court staff. This, however, will not safeguard from entry of those who contract the infection after the testing drive.

But lawyers are divided over mandatory testing at entry. The most common reason cited in opposition to it is the delay it could cause. “There are chances of matters getting delayed if everyone has to get tested,” says Veena Shelar, a prosecutor at the sessions court who just got her first vaccine dose recently. Shelar instead favours an inoculation drive for court staff and prosecutors across ages and suggests testing of all defence advocates.