This development is in the approach of the judiciary toward the integration of technology into judicial proceedings. This judgment is an example of the court's realization that procedural fairness must be balanced with practicality in the access of modern legal systems.Case Background The case emanated from a litigation where one of the parties sought permission from the court to carry out cross-examination of a witness from a different location based on logistical and cost reasons. The other party protested the request because examination in a physical courtroom has credibility and ensures that there will be no form of influence of the witnesses. The petitioner highlighted how virtual courts have become safe as well as effective due to present technology and tenets of service delivery of justice. Important Observations The Hon'ble Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas, while presiding over the matter has observed: "The right to cross-examine a witness is the culmination of cross-examination or the badge that marks the importance of a proper trial as mandated by Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. Such a right does not call for a need to be present physically, especially so when there exist circumstances where technology adoption which does not impair procedural fairness exists.". Video conferencing has become an ordinary tool in the process of delivering justice post-COVID-19. Access to justice was accorded to persons who, by reason of travel, health, or economic constraint, would otherwise be unduly placed at hardship. Moreover, the appeal emphasized the point that as a matter of procedure under Section 273 CrPC, where evidence is sought to be recorded in the presence of the accused, can well be satisfied by the use of live video links. The Kerala High Court has adopted some of the rules to preserve the integrity of the cross-examination process through video conferencing: Identification of the Witness: This includes some form of identification of the witness before they testify. Technology Reliability: Audio and video must be audible and clear and not much disturbed. Neutral Venue: It should be witnessed from a location which is neutral and safe to exclude external influence. Court Supervision: The proceeding must remain under the active supervision of the court. It is a historic ruling in the march toward embracing technology in order to increase access to justice. The court in allowing cross-examinations through video conferencing has indicated a willingness to reduce logistics involved without compromise on fairness and transparency. This judgment by the Kerala High Court would become a precedent in courts of other jurisdictions, when they decide such cases. The Indian judicial system will thus develop to be more comprehensive and effective.