Karnataka Reinvents Justice with Digital Revenue Courts: BOLD 8 STEPS OF HOPE

Karnataka is set to take a significant leap toward modernising its justice delivery system by piloting live streaming and video hearings in revenue courts, a move aimed at improving transparency, accessibility, and efficiency in land and revenue-related मामलों. The initiative, announced by the state government, marks a decisive shift from conventional, paper-heavy court processes to a technology-driven model that seeks to reduce delays and bring the administration of justice closer to citizens. For thousands who regularly engage with revenue courts over land ownership, inheritance, and tenancy disputes, the reform promises a more accountable and citizen-friendly system.

Revenue courts play a crucial role in Karnataka’s governance framework, dealing with some of the most sensitive and high-stakes disputes involving land, which remains a deeply emotional and economic issue across the state. However, these courts have long been criticised for procedural delays, lack of transparency, and the physical hardships faced by litigants who must repeatedly travel long distances to attend hearings. By introducing live streaming and video hearings, the government aims to address these chronic issues while aligning revenue administration with broader digital governance goals.

According to officials, the pilot project will initially be rolled out in select districts, where infrastructure readiness and case volume make them suitable for testing the new system. Live streaming will allow proceedings to be viewed in real time, ensuring transparency and reducing allegations of arbitrariness. Video hearings, meanwhile, will enable parties, lawyers, and officials to participate remotely, cutting down travel time and associated costs. The government believes that this dual approach can significantly ease the burden on citizens and improve case disposal rates.

The decision comes against the backdrop of increasing digitisation across Karnataka’s public services. From online property registration to digital land records, the state has steadily expanded its e-governance footprint. Officials argue that extending this momentum to revenue courts is both logical and necessary. They stress that land disputes often drag on for years, not because of legal complexity alone, but due to procedural inefficiencies that technology can help resolve.

For many citizens, particularly those from rural areas, revenue courts are often perceived as intimidating spaces dominated by paperwork and prolonged adjournments. Video hearings could transform this experience by allowing farmers, senior citizens, and women to participate from nearby government offices or designated facilitation centres. The government has indicated that assistance will be provided to those unfamiliar with digital tools, ensuring that the reform does not inadvertently exclude vulnerable groups.

Legal experts have cautiously welcomed the move, noting that transparency through live streaming could act as a deterrent against malpractice. When proceedings are open to scrutiny, they argue, decision-making becomes more disciplined and consistent. At the same time, experts stress the importance of data security and clear guidelines to protect sensitive information. Land disputes often involve personal and financial details, making robust safeguards essential.

DIGITAL REFORMS AND THE PROMISE OF TRANSPARENCY

The introduction of live streaming in revenue courts represents a cultural shift in how administrative justice is perceived. Traditionally, revenue proceedings have been opaque, with limited public visibility into how decisions are made. This opacity has fuelled allegations of favouritism and corruption over the years. By opening proceedings to public viewing, the government hopes to foster trust and demonstrate its commitment to clean governance.

Officials involved in designing the pilot say that live streaming will follow strict protocols. Not all cases may be streamed in full, particularly those involving sensitive personal matters. However, routine hearings and orders will be accessible, allowing citizens to observe procedures and understand how revenue laws are applied. This, officials believe, will also serve an educational purpose, demystifying legal processes for the public.

Video hearings are expected to be particularly transformative in a state as geographically diverse as Karnataka. Litigants from remote villages often spend entire days travelling to district headquarters for hearings that may last only a few minutes. Such journeys come with economic costs and lost wages, disproportionately affecting marginalised communities. Remote participation could dramatically reduce this burden, making justice more equitable.

The reform is also likely to benefit government officials. Revenue officers, who juggle administrative duties alongside quasi-judicial responsibilities, often struggle with crowded court schedules. Digital hearings can enable better time management and reduce adjournments caused by logistical issues. Officials argue that when hearings are easier to schedule and attend, cases can move forward more predictably.

However, the success of the initiative will depend heavily on infrastructure. Reliable internet connectivity, quality audio-visual equipment, and trained personnel are non-negotiable requirements. The government has acknowledged these challenges and stated that the pilot phase will focus on ironing out technical glitches. Lessons learned from the pilot will inform a broader rollout across the state.

Civil society organisations have welcomed the focus on transparency but urged caution in implementation. They warn that digital systems can sometimes replicate existing power imbalances if not designed inclusively. For instance, if only lawyers or officials have easy access to technology, ordinary litigants may feel sidelined. To counter this, activists are calling for publicly accessible kiosks and clear user support mechanisms.

There is also the question of legal validity. While higher courts have already embraced virtual hearings, revenue courts operate under a different administrative framework. The government has clarified that necessary legal provisions and procedural guidelines will be put in place to ensure that orders passed through video hearings have full legal standing. This clarity is crucial to avoid future disputes over the legitimacy of decisions.

CHALLENGES, SAFEGUARDS, AND THE ROAD AHEAD

Despite the optimism surrounding the initiative, experts caution that technology alone cannot solve systemic issues. Revenue disputes are often entangled with local power dynamics, political influence, and complex land histories. Digital hearings may streamline procedures, but they cannot replace the need for fair and impartial decision-making. Ensuring accountability among officials remains a critical challenge.

Data privacy has emerged as another area of concern. Live streaming, if not carefully regulated, could expose sensitive information to misuse. The government has stated that access controls, anonymisation where necessary, and clear consent protocols will be implemented. Observers stress that these safeguards must be rigorously enforced to prevent unintended consequences.

Training is equally important. Revenue officials, lawyers, and support staff must be adequately trained to use new systems effectively. Without proper capacity-building, there is a risk that technical issues could frustrate users and undermine confidence in the reform. The government has indicated that training modules and standard operating procedures are being developed as part of the pilot.

Political reactions to the initiative have largely been positive, with leaders across parties acknowledging the need to modernise revenue administration. Some, however, have raised concerns about whether digital hearings could be misused to centralise control or reduce local accountability. These voices argue that technology should empower citizens, not distance decision-makers from ground realities.

For litigants, the reform brings cautious hope. Farmers involved in long-pending land disputes see video hearings as a chance to reduce delays that have plagued their cases for years. Urban property owners, too, welcome the possibility of faster resolution and fewer bureaucratic hurdles. At the same time, there is apprehension about adapting to new systems, particularly among older litigants.

The judiciary’s experience during the pandemic has shown that virtual hearings can work, but only with constant refinement. Karnataka’s move to pilot similar systems in revenue courts reflects lessons learned during that period. Officials emphasise that the initiative is not about replacing physical courts entirely but about offering flexible options that suit diverse needs.

As the pilot unfolds, metrics such as case disposal rates, user satisfaction, and technical reliability will be closely monitored. The government has promised to consult stakeholders and make course corrections where necessary. Transparency in evaluating the pilot’s outcomes will be crucial to building public trust.

Ultimately, the move to live streaming and video hearings in revenue courts signals a broader shift in governance philosophy. It reflects an acknowledgment that justice must evolve with technology to remain accessible and credible. For Karnataka, a state with a complex land history and high litigation burden, the reform carries both promise and responsibility.

If implemented thoughtfully, the initiative could redefine how citizens experience administrative justice, turning revenue courts from symbols of delay into platforms of efficiency and openness. Whether this bold experiment becomes a model for other states will depend on its execution. For now, it stands as a hopeful step toward a system where justice is not just delivered, but seen to be delivered, in real time and without barriers.

The initiative has also prompted discussion on how technology could reshape the relationship between citizens and the state. By allowing proceedings to be viewed and accessed remotely, revenue courts may become less intimidating and more participatory. Experts believe this visibility could encourage citizens to better understand land laws and procedures, reducing dependence on intermediaries who often exploit lack of awareness. Over time, this could foster a more informed public that engages with the system confidently rather than fearfully.

There are also expectations that the reform could indirectly reduce corruption. Transparency through live streaming makes discretionary decisions more visible, limiting scope for arbitrary actions. While technology cannot eliminate malpractice on its own, governance specialists argue that openness changes institutional behaviour. When proceedings are subject to observation, even if limited, officials are more likely to adhere strictly to procedure, documentation, and reasoned orders.

As Karnataka prepares to test this digital transition, the success of the pilot will ultimately rest on political will and sustained oversight. Short-term enthusiasm must be matched with long-term commitment to maintenance, upgrades, and inclusivity. If these elements align, live streaming and video hearings in revenue courts could mark a quiet but profound shift in administrative justice, one that prioritises access, dignity, and trust for citizens navigating some of the most personal and contested legal disputes in the state.