Breaking Supreme Court Legal Update
New Delhi · Friday, 31 July 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law — free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2023-10-09 disposed

Kishan Chand Jain vs Union of India & Ors

Bench: 3 — Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J B Pardiwala, Manoj Mishra

In Brief

A citizen challenged the functioning of State Information Commissions (SICs) under the Right to Information Act, 2005, arguing that their physical-only hearings imposed prohibitive costs on applicants and appellants, especially in remote areas, thereby restricting access to the right to information. The Supreme Court held that access to Information Commissions is integral to securing the constitutional right to information, linked to Articles 14, 19(1)(a), and 21. The Court directed all SICs to provide hybrid (virtual and physical) hearings at the applicant's discretion, enable e-filing of complaints and appeals, and establish user-friendly digital infrastructure. The Court emphasized that technology is no longer optional in ensuring effective access to justice and that it is a constitutional duty of the state to adopt these measures.

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Right to Information Act, 2005 Access to Justice Constitutional Rights Digital Infrastructure Hybrid Hearings State Information Commissions Technology and Justice Articles 14, 19(1)(a), 21 Article 32

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login