Ex-diplomat convicted of passing information to ISI
New Delhi, May 18: A court here on Friday convicted former Indian diplomat Madhuri Gupta in a case related to passing on sensitive information to Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI).
Additional Sessions Judge Sidharth Sharma held Gupta guilty under sections of the Official Secrets Act (OSA) and criminal conspiracy under the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
"The conduct of the accused in passing on sensitive/secret information in the light of documents proved on record and evidence led by the prosecution categorically proves the charge under second part of Section 3(1) (c) of the OSA, punishable upto a period of three years, as well as under Section 5 of the OSA read with 120-B IPC," the court said.
However the court acquitted her of the stringent section 3(1) (Part-I) of the Official Secrets Act which attracts a maximum punishment of 14 years.
The court observed that Gupta's action could have been useful to the enemy country "which were strategically very important for the foreign policy of the country and its secrecy was of utmost important".
"In one of the e-mails, the accused is also promising collecting information regarding Hydro Electric Power Projects in Jammu and Kashmir which could have proved useful to the enemy country during war and destruction... could have proved serious crisis to the country," the court said.
The accused was unable to give such information but her intention of passing on such information and her going to Jammu on a false excuse of attending a wedding points to her intention of helping the enemy country, the court noted.
"She (Gupta) had been giving information regarding various postings of officers of defence, Ministry of External Affairs and High Commission of India as well as their family particulars which could have caused danger to the life and security of said officers and their family," the court said in its order.
The court will hear arguments on the quantum of sentence on Saturday.
Gupta revealed certain classified information to Pakistani officials and was in touch with two ISI officials, Mubshar Raza Rana and Jamshed.
As per the chargesheet filed in July 2010, Gupta was in a relationship with Jamshed, whom she planned to marry.
The chargesheet said she used a computer installed at her residence in Islamabad and a Blackberry phone to stay in touch with the two Pakistani spies.
The former diplomat claims she is innocent.
Once a second secretary at the Indian High Commission in Islamabad, Gupta was arrested on April 27, 2010 for spying and on charges of passing on information to the Pakistani intelligence agency.
On January 7, 2012, the trial court charged Gupta with spying under the Official Secrets Act. She was granted bail on January 10, 2012.
Police challenged the order and sought modification of the charges.
The Delhi High Court allowed the plea in February 2016 and directed to frame a charge against Gupta under the section having a maximum punishment of 14 years.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
CJI calls for 'unified judicial policy', use of technology to converge practices across courts
Jaisalmer (PTI): Pushing for a "unified judicial policy", Chief Justice of India Surya Kant on Saturday said technology can help align standards and practices across courts, creating a "seamless experience" for citizens, regardless of their location.
He said high courts -- due to the federal structure -- have had their own practices and technological capacities, and "regional barriers" can be broken down with technology to create a more unified judicial ecosystem.
Delivering the keynote address at the West Zone Regional Conference in Jaisalmer, Kant proposed the idea of a "national judicial ecosystem" and called for an overhaul of India's judicial system with the integration of technology.
"Today, as technology reduces geographical barriers and enables convergence, it invites us to think of justice not as regional systems operating in parallel, but as one national ecosystem with shared standards, seamless interfaces, and coordinated goals," he said.
He emphasised how the role of technology in the judiciary has evolved over time.
"Technology is no longer merely an administrative convenience. It has evolved into a constitutional instrument that strengthens equality before the law, expands access to justice, and enhances institutional efficiency," he said, highlighting how digital tools can bridge gaps in the judicial system.
Kant pointed out that technology enables the judiciary to overcome the limitations of physical distance and bureaucratic hurdles.
"It allows the judiciary to transcend physical barriers and bureaucratic rigidities to deliver outcomes that are timely, transparent and principled," he said, adding that the effective use of technology can modernise the delivery of justice and make it more accessible to citizens across the country.
The CJI called for implementing a "unified judicial policy".
He said India's judicial system has long been shaped by its federal structure, and different high courts have their own practices and technological capacities.
"India's vast diversity has led to different high courts evolving their own practices, administrative priorities and technological capacities. This variation, though natural in a federal democracy, has resulted in uneven experiences for litigants across the country," he said.
Kant underscored that predictability is crucial for building trust in the judicial system.
"A core expectation citizens place upon the courts is predictability," he said, adding that citizens should not only expect fair treatment but also consistency in how cases are handled across the country.
He pointed to the potential of technology in improving predictability.
"Technology enables us to track systemic delays and make problems visible rather than concealed," he said.
By identifying areas where delays occur, such as in bail matters or cases involving certain types of disputes, courts can take targeted action to address these issues and improve efficiency, Kant said.
The CJI explained that data-driven tools could identify the reasons behind delays or bottlenecks, allowing for faster, more focused solutions.
"Technology enables prioritisation by flagging sensitive case categories, monitoring pendency in real time and ensuring transparent listing protocols," he said.
Justice Surya Kant also discussed the importance of prioritising urgent cases where delays could result in significant harm. He highlighted his recent administrative order that ensures urgent cases, such as bail petitions or habeas corpus cases, are listed within two days of curing defects.
"Where delay causes deep harm, the system must respond with urgency," he stated, explaining that technology can help courts identify and expedite such cases.
Kant also raised the issue of the clarity of judicial decisions.
He noted that many litigants, despite winning cases, often struggle to understand the terms of their judgment due to complex legal language.
"Although the orders had gone in their favour, they remained unsure of what relief they had actually secured because the language was too technical, vague or evasive to understand," he said.
He advocated for more uniformity in how judgments are written.
"A unified judicial approach must therefore extend to how we communicate outcomes," he said.
The CJI also discussed the role of AI and digital tools in improving case management. He pointed to the potential of AI-based research assistants and digital case management systems to streamline judicial processes.
"Emerging technological tools are now capable of performing once-unthinkable functions. They can highlight missing precedent references, cluster similar legal questions, and simplify factual narration," he said, explaining how these technologies can help judges make more consistent decisions.
He also highlighted tools like the National Judicial Data Grid and e-courts, which are already helping to standardise processes like case filings and tracking.
Kant reiterated that the integration of technology into the judicial process is not just about improving efficiency but about upholding the integrity of the system and strengthening public trust.
"The measure of innovation is not the complexity of the software we deploy, but the simplicity with which a citizen understands the outcome of their case and believes that justice has been served," he said.
