Introduction

With his utopian yearning for a paganised unified globe devoid of all the limitations and boundaries that afflict our unreal world, Lennon scarcely considered the "Internet." Nonetheless, the Internet and the digital realm in general did usher in a world devoid of limitations. The Internet has brought people and practically every landmass on the planet together, reversing the effects of continental drift. 

The domain was born free—free from national or single-state supremacy, free from territorial restraints, and free from legal restrictions. The "Real" world is now surreal and "Virtual" is a reality thanks to "The Sixth Element," the Internet. Nowadays, using the Internet is as necessary as breathing. A significant portion of the global population no longer imagines a world without connectedness. After the wheel and possibly electricity, the Internet has emerged as the greatest innovation of all time.

From its small beginnings, the Internet has grown into an endless, hungry power that carries anyone caught in its web. The ether-created virtual world was a great way to level the playing field because it didn't depend on money, goods, or possessions. It didn't have any lines or limits based on race, religion, caste, or faith. The Internet grew without being limited by laws, rules, or restrictions, just like early frontier cities in the Wild West and life on Earth before humans. Self-control was the main thing that made it work. The significance of Cyber Security is growing as various stakeholders worldwide are placing it as a top priority. Cyber security has emerged as the foremost term of interest in global politics. It is not surprising that most national leaders and their respective activities have emphasized the importance of cyber security. The significance of cyber security is so crucial that no nation can afford to ignore its growing importance. The Prime Minister of India, Mr. Narendra Modi, has consistently emphasised the importance of cyber security. When the political leadership of a country prioritizes cyber security, it inevitably becomes significant for both the corporate and governmental sectors.

These days, in this digital world, administrative law faces new problems and opportunities because of how Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) are used in public administration. It is easier to get, change, and share large amounts of data with the help of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs). This makes administrative bodies more effective, open, and flexible. Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) can, however, also be dangerous to people's privacy, safety, and sense of self-worth, as well as to democratic values and the rule of law.

The Indian Constitution, as the paramount legal document, acknowledges the significance of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) in the realm of public administration and establishes provisions for their governance and utilisation. The freedom of speech and expression, as enshrined in Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, includes the entitlement to access and distribute information via any available medium. The right to life and personal liberty, encompassing privacy and data protection, is safeguarded by Article 21 of the Constitution. Article 39A of the Constitution stipulates that it is the responsibility of the state to guarantee the equitable availability of justice and legal assistance to all individuals.

The Information Technology Act, 2000 and the Information and Communication Technology Domain

2.1: The Information Technology Act- Pre-2008 Mumbai Attack Position

India was devoid of a legislation that specifically addressed the domain of cyber security. Regarding electronic data and information management, the Information Technology Act of 2000 is the principal statute. Although not explicitly addressing cybersecurity, the legislation does incorporate measures to safeguard computer systems and networks. Under Section 66 of the Act, hacking is classified as a non-bailable Cyber- Crime punishable by a three-year prison sentence and a fine of INR 2,000,000. Damages of up to INR 1,000,000 may result from unauthorised access to computer systems or networks, information extraction, or computer contamination. 

 2.2: The Information Technology Act- Post-2008 Mumbai Attack Position

After the 26/11 attacks in Mumbai, India, there was a big jump in mobile technology, which made the government more aware. The updated Information Technology Act, 2008 went into effect on October 27, 2009. Section 2 (1) (nb) of the updated Information Technology Act, 2000 broadened the meaning of "cybersecurity" in a big way. 

This definition was broadened to include keeping data, devices, computer resources, communication tools, and stored data safe from people, who aren't supposed to see, use, share, disrupt, change, or destroy them. The changes were made on October 27, 2009. In India, cyber security means protecting information, devices, equipment, computers, computer resources, and all the information that is shared on them. All of these things need to be kept safe from the following: unauthorised access, use, disclosure, disruption, modification, and destruction. 

The Rule of Law and Rule of Justice in the ICT Era 

The court's main job is to see that justice is done. If the "Rule of Law" is an important part of the Constitution that can't be changed, then the "Rule of Justice" is clearly better and should also be a fundamental part of the Constitution. The "Concept of Justice" is more important than the rule of law and covers a wider area. The following statement can be used to judge the idea of the "Rule of Justice":

Article 142 of India's Constitution says that everyone will get fair treatment, and the Supreme Court can make decrees or decisions about cases that are still going on. Even if there isn't a specific law, the principles of justice may call for immediate action. We need to follow the "Rule of Law" as well as the "Rule of Justice" in order to have complete justice. In order for the integration of information technology into the justice system to work well and fairly, the two principles must be closely linked. 

So, to sum up, the following can be said about "The Role of Courts in Administering Justice." It is the courts' main job to make sure that justice is done. No changes can be made to the Constitution because the "Rule of Law" is an important part of it. The "Concept of Justice" is more general and important than the "Rule of Law." Article 142 of the Indian Constitution says that the Supreme Court has the power to make decisions that are fair for everyone. The principles of justice may call for quick action, even if there aren't any specific laws that say so. There needs to be a balance between the "Rule of Law" and the "Rule of Justice" for IT to work well in the justice system. 

Jurisdiction in the Cyber Space

Introduction 

In contrast to the physical realm, the virtual realm lacks geographical boundaries. On the internet, there are no political boundaries or divisions. Cyberspace is a unified domain that lacks any territorial borders.  This worldwide platform has revolutionised the world, uniting it into a singular community; a singular 'global space' fuelled by rapid connectivity and possessing immense capacity for information exchange. Although the cyber domain offers numerous benefits, its unique characteristics, such as challenges in establishing jurisdiction and the concept of 'anonymity', frequently perplex administrators, governments, and the online community. One of the most complex difficulties in the development of internet law is the fundamental question of jurisdiction in cyberspace.

Jurisdiction Types and Meaning

Jurisdiction' means the power or authority of a court to adjudge a case. In case a court lacks jurisdiction, it's judgement has no force in law. Jurisdiction is mainly characterized into three types- 'Subject Matter Jurisdiction' and 'Personal Jurisdiction'. There is also a third category which is 'Pecuniary Jurisdiction'. All the three are required to be satisfied if a judgement delivered by a court is to have validity and enforceability.

• Subject Matter Jurisdiction

Courts are allowed to hear and decide on cases that fall into a certain category of subjects.  Criminal cases can't be heard in civil courts, and civil cases can't be heard in criminal courts.

• Personal Jurisdiction

Courts have the jurisdiction to hear and make decisions on cases involving specific individuals. The defendant must be a resident of the geographical jurisdiction where the court is located.

• Pecuniary Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction is determined by the monetary value of the claim. Hierarchical jurisdiction may be used, with courts with jurisdiction over 20 Lac adjudicating cases involving compensation above 20 Lac.

Prerequisites of Jurisdiction in the Cyber Space

For a Judgement to be valid and enforceable, three pre-requisites need to be satisfied, namely 'The Jurisdiction to Prescribe' 'The Jurisdiction to Adjudicate' and 'The Jurisdiction to Enforce':

• Jurisdiction to Prescribe

Jurisdiction to prescribe refers to a government's authority to enforce laws on specific groups of individuals. In the United States, the Restatement (Third) of Foreign Relations Law of the United Nations, 1987, outlines when a country can establish laws regarding actions within its borders, legal status of individuals or rights associated with things within its borders, actions outside its borders but intended to have a significant impact within its borders, activities, interests, legal status, or relationships of citizens both within and outside its borders, and actions directed against the country's security or national interests. These principles, known as the 'Territorial Principle', 'Nationality Principle', 'Effect Principles', and 'Protection Principles', ensure that jurisdictional exercise must adhere to reasonableness standards, as outlined in the Restatement (Third) of Foreign Relations Law of the United States.

• Jurisdiction to Adjudicate

Jurisdiction to adjudicate refers to a legal forum's authority to resolve disputes involving individuals or objects. Courts determine jurisdiction based on precedents, reasonableness, defendant's presence, actions, and nationality. The Indian Information Technology Act, 2000, applies to illegal activities and violations outside India, including computer-related offenses. However, jurisdiction issues can be challenging, especially if transferring individuals to another country. 

A. The Restatement (Third) of Foreign Relation Law of the United  States (1987)

The outcome of a property dispute depends on the defendant's presence, actions, location, influence outside the state, and their nationality or residence. The defendant's presence in the jurisdiction and the impact of their actions are key factors in determining the outcome of a property ownership dispute. The location of the property within the state is also crucial. States may assert jurisdiction over an out-of-state defendant based on their actions outside the state, their nationality, and place of residence. 

B. The Information Technology Act, 2000 (The IT Act, 2000)

The Indian Information Technology Act, 2000, establishes rules for illegal activities and violations outside India, including those involving computers. However, jurisdiction issues arise, especially for non-residents transferring to another country, posing challenges for legal resolution.

Section 1(2) read with Section 75 of the IT Act, 2000, applies to any illegal activity or violation committed outside India. The Act applies to any criminal or violation committed by anyone, regardless of their country, if the offence includes a computer, computer system, or computer network located in India. The Act prescribes rules for non-residents engaging in criminal activities outside India. Jurisdiction for legal resolution can pose a challenge, especially if the individual is transferred to another country.

• Jurisdiction to Enforce

The jurisdiction to enforce means a State’s power to direct a person to mandate compliance of its rules and regulations by various means including administrative or police action, or judicial or non- judicial action. It also means the State’s power to punish an offender of law for violation of laws of the State. The jurisdiction to enforce shall apply if a state has the jurisdiction to prescribe. Very rarely a State may allow another State's law enforcement team to enforce their own State's laws within the jurisdiction of another State without due written consent of the State.

The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908

Section 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) in India states that a foreign judgment is final and binding unless it's issued by a court with the necessary authority, based on the case's merits, contains an erroneous interpretation of international law, or fails to recognize Indian law. The Indian Court will not acknowledge a foreign verdict if proceedings violate natural justice, are obtained fraudulently, or support a claim against Indian law. 

Section 44-A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 allows for court orders from other countries, specifically those recognized by India as 'Reciprocating Countries'. Therefore, it is crucial to establish international conventions and treaties to effectively tackle cyber-crimes.

In the case of ‘Satya v. Teja Singh’, the Supreme Court held that Indian courts are not obligated to acknowledge divorce orders from foreign jurisdictions. The court found that the order was issued by a court lacking authority and influenced by fraudulent actions, and therefore, it is not acknowledged under Indian law, as per Section 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. 

In the case of ‘R.Vishwanathan v. Rukn Ul-Mulk Syed Abdul Wajid’ : The court ruled that a foreign judgment is not final if it violates natural justice principles, and a judgement influenced by prejudice or impartiality is invalid, indicating a trial lacking a competent judge, as per clause (d) of Section 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Principles of Good Governance

Good decision-making processes in the public sector require clarity about the purpose and who will make it, appropriate information acquisition through research, consultation, and public consultation, timely decision-making, proportionate resource allocation, a deliberation stage, effective communication, accountability to Parliament, local authorities, the Ombudsman, and legal scrutiny, and learning from mistakes. These stages may be structured by law, and trade-offs may be necessary.

Some of the Public Sector Decision-Making Elements are as follows: Clarity on decision purpose and decision-maker. Acquiring necessary information through research, investigation, public consultation, or specific processes. A timely decision to achieve benefits and minimize burdens. Proper use of resources is proportional to benefits and burdens. Stage of deliberation to produce the decision. Effective communication and action upon decision. Accountability process for decision-makers, including Parliament, local authority meetings, Ombudsman scrutiny, and legal scrutiny. Learning from mistakes and balancing trade-offs. 

In order to effectively manage and govern the Cyber-Space the Judiciary and Executive are working in tandem. With the Executive part of the Government doing so by following the traditional principles of Good governance, with the Judiciary plays its role in modernising its infrastructure adding to the effectiveness in providing speedy justice thus ensuring that the Principles of Good Governance are followed to the fullest extent possible.

Emergence of E-Courts

Phase I

The Supreme Court in India established an e-committee to computerize all courts, with the initial phase completed in 2014. Around 5000 new courts have been established, and existing courts require improved Information Technology Tools and additional computers for judges. The concept also involved implementing a Video-Conferencing System between District Courts and Jails to efficiently handle cases without postponing sessions due to under trial prisoners. The E-Committee, led by Justice Madan B Lokur, submitted a policy and action plan paper for Phase II of the E-Courts to the Chief Justice of India in January 2014. 

India's Supreme Court's E-Committee for Court Computerization. was established over a decade ago to computerize courts. The initial phase completed in 2014, with 5000 new courts established. Improved 'Information Technology Tools' were needed for existing courts and additional computers for judges. Implemented a 'Video-Conferencing System' between District Courts and Jails’-Committee led by Justice Madan B Lokur who submitted 'Policy and action plan paper for Phase II of the E-Courts' to the Chief Justice of India. 

Phase II- Docket Management System

This phase of the project involved computerizing all 18000 courts, digitalising records, and implementing a court docket management mechanism for District Judges. Docket management is crucial for efficient use of judicial officers' services, ensuring equitable workload distribution among personnel. 

District Judges can easily access workload information on the court website, reallocating tasks to expedite case resolution. The project is ongoing and has a long-term duration, allowing for efficient use of staff and efficient case resolution. 

Phase II of the E- Court Project was hence, launched with the following objectives in mind. It Digitalized records and implemented a court docket management mechanism for and District Judges. Docket Management ensures equitable workload distribution among judicial personnel. District Judges can easily access workload information on the court website. E-committee sources suggest reallocating tasks to expedite case resolution. Phase II of the E Court Project is still an ongoing project for it's a long-term goal to be completed. 

Conclusion

Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) are important for public administration, and the Indian Constitution sets rules for how they can be used and governed. The IT Act of 2000 added protecting data, devices, computer resources, communication tools, and stored data from unauthorised access to cyber security. The "Concept of Justice" is bigger and more important than the "Rule of Law." It is the court's job to make sure that justice is done. There is a constitution in India that says everyone should be treated fairly, and the Supreme Court can make decisions about cases that are continuing. "Rule of Law" and "Rule of Justice" must be balanced for IT to be used fairly and effectively in the justice system. Subject Matter Jurisdiction, Personal Jurisdiction, and Pecuniary Jurisdiction are the three main types of cyber jurisdiction that are being worked on in the field of internet law.

Good governance principles, such as making decisions clear about their purpose and holding decision-makers accountable, are what the E Court Project aims to do to improve India's courts. As part of the project, the E-Committee for Court Computing was created. Its goal is to make courts more computerised and improve IT tools. A video-conferencing system has also been set up between jails and district courts as part of the project to speed up cases. Also, the E-Committee for Court Computing set up a Docket Management System to keep track of district judges' court cases and make sure that judges' workloads are evenly split. The project's long-term goal is to make good use of the services of judicial officers and evenly distribute their work. The project is currently ongoing. The E-Court Project is a big step towards making the courts work better and promoting good government in the country.

References

1. The Song Imagine. EMI. (As referred by N S Nappinai in the book ‘Nappinai . (2017). Technolgy Laws Decoded  (First). Lexis Nexis. p.1.

2. Bajpai , & Mohnot . (2016). Judgements that shaped the Indian Jurisprudence- Supreme Court Rulings in Perspective (1950-2016) (First). Thomson Reuters. p.71.

3. Ibid p.71-p.72

4. Shrivastava, Dr. (2016). Law relating to Science and Technology  (First). Thomson Reuters. p. 498.

5. Ibid p.499.

6. Seth. (2016). Computers, Internet and New Technology Laws [A comprehensive reference work with special focus on developments in India] (First). Lexis Nexis .p.28.

7. Section 402,403 and 421 of the Restatement (Third) of Foreign Relation Law, 1987.

8. Seth. (2016). Computers, Internet and New Technology Laws [A comprehensive reference work with special focus on developments in India] (First). Lexis Nexis.p.29.

9. 1975 AIR 105, 1975 SCR (2) 97.

10. 1963 AIR, 1 1963 SCR (3) 22.

11. S.H. (2018). Bailey, Jones & Mowbray’s Cases, Materials and Commentary on Administrative Law  (5th ed.). Sweet & Maxwell. P.31.

12. Shrivastava, Dr. (2016). Law relating to Science and Technology  (First). Thomson Reuters.p.502.

13. Ibid, p.502.