nearest
smooth
Table 21
Template for an Audit Checklist.
Infrastructure:
Spatial design and adjacencies of physical amenities including external and internal areas such as site entrance, parking, building entrance, Courtrooms, waiting areas, administrative offices, security systems, and technology infrastructure.
Environment:
Considering the overall atmosphere and conditions within the Complex, including cleanliness, safety measures, proper signage, comfort for visitors, and compliance with building codes and regulations.
Service Delivery Methods:
Assessing the accessibility and efficiency of technology and IT services such as video-conferencing, data and evidence storage, e-Seva Kendra services, etc.
Planning and Commissioning:
This phase involves setting the scope, objectives, and parameters of the audit. It includes defining what aspects of the Court Complex will be audited, establishing goals, and securing resources and support for the audit.
Team Preparation:
A team of specialists and experts must be constituted to undertake the audit effectively. This team may include architects, accessibility auditors, occupational therapists, consultants specialising in legal infrastructure, and Persons with Disabilities who can provide valuable insights into accessibility and usability.
Briefing and Data Gathering:
This stage involves conducting site surveys, collecting relevant data, and thoroughly examining the Court Complex. It includes assessing the physical infrastructure, technological aspects, environmental conditions, and accessibility features.
Consultations and Interviews:
This stage involves engaging with the diverse user groups to understand their experiences, challenges, and needs in accessing and utilising the Court Complex efficiently.
Audit Methodology and Guidelines:
Clear methodologies and guidelines for recording data collected during the audit process must be developed. This may include standardised checklists, evaluation criteria, and procedures for assessing compliance with accessibility standards and other relevant regulations.
Recommendations and Reporting:
This stage involves analysing the gathered data and formulating recommendations based on the findings. These recommendations should address deficiencies, propose improvements, and outline actionable steps to enhance the Court Complex's accessibility, adaptability, comfort and safety, efficiency, and sustainability. A comprehensive report summarising the audit process, findings, and recommendations is then compiled.
Analysing User Needs:
Consider the diverse needs and experiences of users including staff and visitors like elderly, expectant mothers, children, Persons with Disabilities, including mobility, vision, hearing, and cognitive impairments.
Mapping User Paths:
Identify the typical sequences of movement through the environment for different user groups, such as entering the facility, navigating within spaces, and accessing amenities.
Assessing Suitability:
Evaluate the suitability of the environment for various user journeys, considering factors such as accessibility of pathways, availability of assistive devices, and usability of facilities.
Incorporating Feedback:
Gather feedback from users including Persons with Disabilities or advocacy groups to ensure that the audit accurately reflects the experiences and perspectives of diverse users.
Environment Assessment:
Conduct a comprehensive assessment of the physical environment, including entrances, pathways, signage, parking areas, sanitary provisions, service cores, circulations, and other facilities such as emergency preparedness, communication and technology assessment, etc.
Barrier Identification:
Identify barriers to accessibility, such as physical obstacles, ease of operations, inadequate signage, poor lighting, or non-compliant features.
Documentation:
Document audit findings using a structured format, including photographs, measurements, drawings and detailed descriptions of accessibility issues.
Severity Assessment:
Evaluate the severity and impact of identified barriers on users with disabilities, considering factors such as usability, safety, and independence.
Implementing Remediation Measures:
Action plan based on audit findings to address concerns and improve usability. This may include modifications to physical infrastructure, installation of assistive devices, or updates to policies and procedures.
Training and Awareness:
raining for staff members on guidelines, best practices, and the importance of inclusive design. For further details on sensitisation, please refer to
Section 5.1.
Regular Inspections:
Regular inspections of the environment to identify any new barriers or issues that may arise over time. This proactive approach allows for prompt resolution of concerns and ensures ongoing compliance with standards and resolution of identified issues.
Maintenance Protocols:
Implement maintenance protocols to ensure that all features such as accessibility features including ramps, lifts, doors, and tactile paving, family-friendly facilities, washrooms for the third gender, etc., are functioning properly and are well-maintained.
Feedback Mechanisms:
Establish feedback mechanisms, such as suggestion boxes or online portals, to allow users to report concerns or provide input on improvements. The accessibility app proposed in this Handbook, may be integrated with a feedback mechanism (as recommended) to gather feedback from all users. For further details, please refer to
Annexure 9
Critical:
Recommendations deemed critical are those necessary for ensuring safety or access that would otherwise be unsafe or impossible.
Essential:
Recommendations categorised as essential represent best practices that should be implemented for optimal outcomes.
Pre - Design Stage: to prepare the Court Complex building programme which defines the spatial and functional requirements and design considerations; and
Post-Occupancy Stage: to evaluate the design of a user-centric Court Complex.
PART D - IMPLEMENTATION, MONITORING & EVALUATION
MONITORING & EVALUATION
In order to ensure that the functions and facilities within the Court Complex are sufficiently meeting the needs of all users, regular monitoring and evaluation should be undertaken by the High Court Building Committees as well as the users of the Court Complex. In this section, the various mechanisms that can be used to undertake regular evaluation and monitoring exercises have been covered.
6.1.
User Experience Survey
The Design Principles and Guidelines of this Handbook, prepared using feedback from users of the Court facilities and stakeholders involved in the Court design and management process, provide a framework for evaluating Court Complex designs. A User Experience Survey may be used to gather inputs at:
The User Experience Survey template provided in this Handbook engages with the Court users in evaluating their perception of the building design and related systems. It seeks to gather feedback on how well an existing Court or a newly designed Court Complex aligns with the Design Principles and Guidelines recommended in this Handbook.
The feedback from the Survey would help to chalk out improvements or plan retrofits/upgrades for spaces and facilities in newly designed Court Complexes. Prioritising and implementing changes post-evaluation is critical for user-centric design. The findings of the survey can be categorised into
high, medium, and low priority
and issues may be prioritised accordingly. High priority issues may be tackled at the onset to enhance user experience. An action plan can be developed, responsibilities assigned, and clear timelines can be set for implementation accordingly. Changes made could be continuously iterated and validated for a user-centric approach.
The User Experience Survey template given below provides a framework for recording user experience related to each Design Principle, by engaging prominent user groups.
A. Survey Template
I. Accessibility
Table 16:
User Experience Survey for Accessibility.
II. Adaptability
Table 17:
User Experience Survey for Adaptability.
III. Comfort and Safety
Table 18:
User Experience Survey for Comfort and Safety.
IV. Efficiency
Table 19:
User Experience Survey for Efficiency.
V. Sustainability
Table 20:
User Experience Survey for Sustainability.
6.2.
Post Occupancy Evaluation Framework: Audit Toolkit
It is recommended that an assessment of the functioning of District Court buildings should be carried out by the High Court after construction and occupation by obtaining feedback from all users. Typically, a post-occupancy evaluation/assessment should be conducted after 12-15 months of the building occupancy.
An assessment/audit framework with specific objectives must be prepared in consultation with experts who were not involved in the original design or construction of the specific Court Complex. The concerned High Court may engage independent research organisations/institutions or appoint a Committee with multi-disciplinary experts having experience working with diverse stakeholders and vulnerable groups.
Audits within a Court Complex play a critical role in ensuring that the infrastructure, environment, and service delivery methods align with the needs of diverse user groups. The Court Complex, being a multi-faceted institution, requires various elements to function effectively and serve its purpose. These can be carried out in either existing buildings or proposed developments.
Audits may be undertaken of the following aspects:
A. Components of the Audit
The following steps must be undertaken for planning and undertaking the audit of a Court Complex:
By following these steps, an audit of the Court Complex can provide a comprehensive assessment of its infrastructure and service delivery methods, ensuring alignment with the diverse needs of its users and facilitating necessary improvements for a more accessible, efficient and user-centric justice administration system.
B. Audit Methodology
I. User Journey Sequence
Understanding the user journey sequence is essential for assessing the suitability of the environment from the perspective of different users. This involves:
II. Audit Survey
The audit survey involves a planned and methodical assessment of the Court Complex. It follows a logical and sequential approach, encompassing:
III. Operations and Maintenance
Strategies for ongoing operations and maintenance should be implemented to ensure continued accessibility and usability of the environment.
C. Making Recommendations
The recommendations provided should further be prioritised based on the significance of each suggestion rather than strict adherence to predefined timelines such as "long-term planning" or "within the next 6 months," which may not always align with the critical needs of the recommended modifications.
These recommendations may be categorised as follows:
By prioritising based on criticality and importance rather than arbitrary timelines, resources can be allocated more effectively, addressing the most urgent needs first.
D. Audit Checklist and Reporting Template
Documenting the survey and gathering data may involve tasks such as note-taking, annotating plans, sketching, and completing checklists by using observation assessment and survey equipment including measuring tape, instrument for measuring gradients, door pressure gauge, light metres, sound pressure metres, etc.
Pre-prepared checklists, if organised logically, can be highly beneficial. This checklist should be accompanied by detailed explanations, visual aids, case study references, and recommendations, all of which should align with the guidelines for the final report.
The checklist should be tailored according to the specific type of audit being conducted, taking into account factors such as site conditions, objectives, and other relevant considerations.
The Audit Checklist given below provides a framework for undertaking an audit of all spaces within the Court Complex. However, to ensure that the audit is undertaken systematically, it is recommended that the experts, as mentioned in
Section 6.2.A
must be onboarded.
Lato
justified
GT Super Text
1px solid lightGray
lato
& .
Source:
black
item-
subItem-
nestedItem-
square
1px solid red
Image Credit:
red
Accessibility of parking facilities at site level
Accessibility of site and building entrances
Ease of movement/navigation through segregated paths at site level
Accessibility of infrastructure/furniture
Adequacy of provision of assistive aids for the accessibility needs of all users in workspaces and courtrooms
&.bold-text
&:first-child
&:last-child
&:nth-of-type(odd)
Survey Questions
Assessment Parameters
Assessment Scale
Comments
How would you rate your experience with respect to the following parameters?
Note the reason for your rating below
GUIDELINE 1:
Provide Inclusive and Accessible Facilities and Infrastructure
How accessible do you find the entrances, movement paths, and parking facilities provided in the Court Complex site?
For example, how well-lit and accessible are the site and building entrances and parking spaces?
How easy is it for diverse user groups to access the building entrances safely and without conflict?
How accessible are the furniture, infrastructure and assistive aids provided in the workspaces and courtrooms?
For example, how ergonomically suitable is the furniture provided in the workspaces for Persons with Disabilities?
How well are the accessibility needs of diverse users addressed with use of assistive aids?
How accessible are the common amenities provided in the Court Complex?
Accessibility of common amenities and movement spaces for all users
For example, how easy is it to access the washrooms, sanitary provisions, canteens, crèche, waiting areas, e-Seva Kendras, ATMs, banks, etc.?
How accessible are the corridors leading to various facilities and amenities within the Court Complex?
How accessible is the infrastructure designated for persons with specific needs?
Accessibility of infrastructure designated for persons with special needs
For example, if a parking space is designated for persons with disabilities, how accessible is it, and has it been repurposed for some other use?
GUIDELINE 2:
Provide Legible and Accessible Information and Wayfinding Systems
How intuitive and easy is it to find information, orient and navigate through the spaces of the Court Complex?
Ease of access, orientation and navigation within the Court Complex
Enhanced user experience through Integration of information and wayfinding systems with the Court building design
For example, how well designed and effective are the signs in terms of usage of icons, font size, colour and type, to communicate information to diverse users such as persons with hearing, vision and physical impairments, and persons from different linguistic backgrounds?
How clear, concise and legible is the design of the signage system to aid diverse user groups?
Legibility, user-friendliness and accessibility of signage systems through adoption of universal design principles
GUIDELINE 3:
Ensure Accessible and Culturally Relevant Design for Diverse Users
How inclusive and accessible is the Court Complex for people of all ages, gender, ability, sizes, caste, class and religion, and persons with specific health conditions?
Acknowledgement of diversity of all users to bring an inclusive approach to Court design
For example, how accessible is the washroom for persons of different genders and for children, elderly and persons with specific health conditions?
How useful and effective have the training and capacity building sessions been in bringing awareness/sensitising on difficulties faced by diverse users of the court complexes?
Usefulness and efficacy of training and capacity building/sensitisation/awareness programmes
How friendly, non-intimidating and accessible is the design of the public interface of the Court building for diverse users?
Friendliness, non-intimidating nature, accessibility, transparency and design aesthetics of the public interface of the Court building for diverse users
For example, how non-intimidating and transparent is the image of the court building and the building entrance itself?
How accessible and relatable is the design of the spaces of the court complex to ensure a sense of belonging and cultural responsiveness?
Accessibility and sense of belongingness through adoption of design features that are culturally responsiveness to local history traditions in the Court Complex design
For example, how well does the Court building signage system respond to local cultural history and traditions by use of artwork, iconography and other design features, to make users feel welcome?
How well does the design of the Court Complex promote social integration and involvement of the local community to ensure accessibility?
Level of social integration and involvement of the local community/public in the design of the Court Complex to ensure accessibility
For example, how well is the local community integrated in the Court Complex design process and what opportunities are provided for their social involvement?
GUIDELINE 4:
Ensure Accessible Emergency Preparedness and Evacuation Systems
How accessible, safe and intuitive are the signages and evacuation systems in times of emergencies?
Accessibility and safety of the emergency evacuation systems and signages
For example, how accessible and safe are the evacuation routes, signages, assembly areas, warning systems and alerts, and provision of ambulance/medical facilities during a fire emergency? Are there provisions for audio/video alerts?
How accessible and streamlined are the emergency systems to enhance the overall preparedness and ensure efficient responses?
Efficiency of plans and procedures for emergency preparedness and response systems and accessibility of its features
For example, how accessible are the ramps, lifts, alert systems, etc. and how regularly are the emergency systems tested to ensure ease of functioning of the systems?
How useful and effective have the training and awareness programmes been in ensuring that staff are well-versed with the operations and maintenance of emergency and accessibility features under diverse conditions?
Usefulness and efficacy of training and awareness programmes for operating and maintaining emergency services and its accessibility features
Anticipate and Plan for Future Growth of Court Functions
How flexibly can new construction or additional buildings be accommodated in the site, or new facilities or additional spaces be accommodated in the building?
Flexibility of the site plan and building construction plan to accommodate additional workspaces/amenities for future use with ease through adoption of a Phasing Plan
For example, has a Phasing Plan been adopted to accommodate additional facilities in the Court Complex? If yes, how adaptable is it to accommodate facilities such as security staff quarters, parking, bank, post office and other amenities, and judicial residential quarters, particularly if the Court Complex is located in a context where such services and facilities are not in proximity?
How easy is it to accommodate future expansion at the site level while ensuring optimal use of space in a feasible and cost-effective manner?
Optimal use of the site to accommodate future expansion without disruption of functions
Cost-effectiveness and feasibility of future expansion plans
Provide a Scalable and Flexible Building Structure
How adaptable is the structural design of the building for vertical expansion to accommodate new functions and to withstand earthquakes?
Adaptability of the building structure to expand vertically
Adaptability of buildings to withstand earthquakes
For example, how adaptable is the building design in terms of provision of structural redundancy to add floors?
Is there provision of expansion joints to ensure adaptability of buildings in earthquake prone zones?
How adaptable and scalable is the building floor plan and design to add, modify and partition spaces for new functions?
Flexibility and scalability of building plans to accommodate additional functions, or modification through adoption of a modular building structure
For example, how adaptable and scalable is the building design in terms of provision of modular grid frame structure with standardised floor-to-ceiling heights to enable partitioning of existing spaces or combining of spaces to accommodate future functions?
Design Adaptable and Convertible Workspaces
How adaptable is the plan and design of internal spaces for additions and retrofitting or to accommodate the changing needs of its stakeholders?
Adaptability of the floor plan and building design to accommodate change (additions and retrofitting)
For example, how adaptable is the building design to accommodate a new Vulnerable Witness Deposition Room?
Provide Flexible Infrastructure to Accommodate Changes
How easy is it to reconfigure and adapt the physical infrastructure provided in the Court Complex to accommodate new functions?
Adaptability of the physical infrastructure and ease of reconfiguration of furniture
For example, how easy is it to adapt the infrastructure provided to accommodate new digital facilities such as audio-visual facilities within the Court Complex? How flexible are the furniture such as desks, chairs and storage units, in terms of modularity, to enable reconfiguration of the layout plans of internal spaces?
Adopt Design Strategies to Mitigate Security Risks for All People and Property
How adequate and safe are the vehicular and pedestrian routes at the site level and how effectively are conflicts avoided between the two routes?
Ease of movement and safety along vehicular and pedestrian routes
For example, how well segregated are the pedestrian paths from the vehicular paths from the site entrance to the building entrance/parking?
How secure and non-conflicting are the paths provided for diverse users at the site level?
Safety and ease of movement along paths for diverse users
For example, have segregated paths and restricted zones been provided, and how secure and non-conflicting are they for vulnerable witnesses in POCSO and Family Courts? Are they designed to ensure safety?
How well does the site topography and design, and building layout contribute to the sense of safety and security?
Sense of safety and security through site design
For example, how effectively does the site level design, in terms of use of site topography, water bodies, landscaping, etc., contribute to unobstructed visibility of the building entrances from security cabins?
How easy is it to find areas on the site where it is possible for persons to conceal themselves/conduct undesirable activities?
How well-designed are the levels of access to secured areas through adoption of territorial reinforcement approaches?
Sense of security and management of levels of access to secured areas through adoption of territorial reinforcement approaches
For example, if the site design adopts low walls, fences, signs, landscaping, etc., to reinforce territories, how well do they define levels of access to secured areas from the street to the building entrance?
How non-intimidating are the safety and security features of the Court Complex that use advanced technology?
Sense of safety and friendliness of safety and security features using advanced technology
For example, how non-intimidating are the security measures, such as scanning machines and video surveillance systems, used at the entrance of the Court building?
Design the Internal Environment of Buildings for the Wellbeing of All Users
How comfortable and suitable is the design of the light and ventilation of the internal spaces of the Court Complex?
Personal wellbeing and comfort of internal spaces through provision of natural light and ventilation
For example, how comfortable are the works spaces in the Court Complex in terms of provision of natural light and ventilation which helps to maintain circadian rhythms of users?
How comfortable and suitable is the design of the ambient qualities of the internal environment of the spaces?
Comfort, calmness and non-stressful nature of the internal environment of spaces through design of ambient qualities
For example, how comfortable is the internal environment of work spaces or public waiting areas in terms of ambient qualities such as noise, temperature, use of colour and texture?
How comfortable and suitable is the infrastructure provided within the Court Complex?
Comfort of the infrastructure provided within the internal spaces
For example, how comfortable is the furniture provided in the work spaces or the e-kiosks provided in the waiting area?
How comfortable and pleasing is the aesthetics and design of the internal environment to create a sense of psychological safety and calmness?
Comfort, aesthetics and sensory experience of the internal environment of spaces
For example, how well designed is the waiting area or deposition room in the VWDC in terms of provision of greenery, use of colours and other design features to create an open, non-confrontational place that brings a sense of psychological safety for vulnerable witnesses?
Provide Common Amenities Designed for the Comfort of All Users
How adequate is the provision of common amenities in the Court Complex to ensure the comfort of all users?
Adequacy of provision of common amenities and facilities to ensure comfort
For example, How adequate are the numbers of toilets provided for all genders, or how adequate is the waiting area space to accommodate all users comfortably?
How adequately do the common amenities cater to the needs of diverse users to ensure comfort and accessibility?
Comfort and accessibility of common amenities to cater to the needs of diverse users
For example, How adequately do the amenities provide for the comfort and accessibility needs of diverse users such as children, elderly, mothers, and persons of different ethnic and religious backgrounds?
Is there adequate provision of amenities such as a crèche, mother’s feeding room, family-friendly washrooms, multi-faith prayer rooms and other such facilities?
How well-maintained are the common amenities to ensure safety and comfort?
Maintenance of common amenities to ensure comfort
For example, How hygienic and clean are the washrooms? Are the childrens’ play areas well-maintained?
Provide Infrastructure and Systems for Safety in Case of Emergencies
How safe and accessible is the Court Complex in times of emergencies for diverse users?
Adequacy and accessibility of provision of safety systems for safety in case of emergencies
For example, How adequate are the warning systems, signage and other evacuation facilities including access to the closest exit, safe routes, assembly points, etc., for evacuation of diverse users?
Have building floor plans with emergency evacuation instructions that are legible for diverse users been provided on each floor in all work spaces and public areas?
How safe is the Court Complex in terms of preparation and implementation of adequate emergency evacuation policies, plans and procedures and ensuring awareness of rules and protocols in times of emergencies?
Safety in times of emergency achieved by preparing and implementing policies, plans and procedures and ensuring awareness of rules and protocols
For example, how well are safety concerns addressed by preparing an evacuation plan and conducting regular emergency evacuation drills for diverse user groups?
How safe is the Court Complex in terms of compliance with the Fire and Life Safety norms of the NBC (2016)?
Safety achieved through compliance of the building design with the Fire and Life Safety norms as per the NBC (2016)
For example, how well are safety concerns addressed by ensuring the emergency exits are designed as per the NBC norms to ensure they are accessible to diverse user groups?
How secure is the Court Complex for diverse user groups in terms of management of the safety and security systems to address the needs of the diverse user groups?
Assured security of the Court Complex for diverse users through the management of security systems for diverse user groups
For example, how well-prepared is the Court to maintain security in terms of conducting training, capacity building and sensitisation programmes for security personnel to understand the needs of diverse users?
Plan and Design Spaces for Optimal Use
How effectively are the functions of the court complex organised on the site and how efficiently can you move from one function to another?
Effectiveness of spatial organisation of functions
Efficiency of circulation
For example, How well planned is the location of the building entrance, parking, washrooms and other amenities on the site?
How adequate is the infrastructure provided for the Court’s functions?
Adequacy of infrastructure or spaces provided for your use
Adequacy of provision of number of facilities and amenities
For example, How adequate are the number of Courts provided, considering the caseload? How crowded are the Court spaces?
How coherently are the functions within the Court building organised, and how efficiently can you move from one function/workspace to another?
Coherent and logical arrangement of functions
Adjacency of workflow and circulation
For example, How well planned are the locations of functions such as the Copying Branch and Pending Branch considering that they need to be adjacent to the Courtroom for efficient workflow?
Provide Facilities that Meet the Needs of All Users
How effectively do the physical infrastructure facilities provided meet the needs of all users?
Effectiveness and accessibility of infrastructure provided for all users
For example, How effectively does the furniture, digital infrastructure, wayfinding and information systems, etc., respond to the needs of varied users including judges, lawyers, staff, accused and litigants?
Adopt Efficient Building Operations and Management Systems
How effectively are the building services operation and managed?
Effectiveness of the operations and management of building services
For example, how well do the services such as heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (“HVAC”), plumbing, electrical, and other operations, ensure a comfortable, functional, and safe work environment through adoption of smart solutions?
How well and efficiently are the building systems maintained to ensure efficiency in the long run?
Efficiency of the internal and external building systems
For example, how well is the efficiency maintained through periodic audits, upgrades, and maintenance of the internal or external building systems?
Optimise Site Potential and Adopt Sustainable Site Planning Practices
How sustainable is the approach/access to the Court Complex?
Sustainability of transport options and choices to access the site
For example, how easy is it for people to access the site by public transport, walking or bicycling?
How sustainable are the site planning practices towards ensuring optimisation of existing structures and the physical geography and natural resources of the site?
Optimisation and sustainability of site planning practices
For example, how well are the existing buildings repurposed and retrofitted to optimise their use?
How well is the building layout planned to ensure least impact on the site’s ecological resources, including maintaining site contours and views; preserving existing natural features and habitats; conserving eco-sensitive zones; and preventing soil erosion when applicable?
How sustainable is the landscaping practices for the Court Complex?
Sustainability of landscaping practices
For example, how sustainable has the planting been in terms of adopting local, low maintenance and drought-resistant plants for landscaping?
How sustainable is the site level water management system?
Sustainability of site level water management systems
For example, how sustainably is the site level water drainage managed in terms of using rainwater harvesting, permeable pavers, water retention ponds, swales and rain gardens that promote groundwater recharge?
Practise a Context-Sensitive Approach to Building Design
How sustainable is the building construction and design in its response to the local climate and geography?
Building design sustainability
For example, How well has the building design and construction practices been responsive to local cultural context in terms of conveying an identity through building style, local materials and use of architectural elements?
How sustainably responsive should the building construction and design be to the local cultural context?
Sustainable response to local culture
For example, How well has the building design incorporated local art and iconography to ensure long-term connection with the local community?
Optimise Carbon Reduction, Reduce Environmental Impact and Increase the Building Life Cycle
How sustainable is the building construction and design practice in terms of being environmentally friendly and reducing embodied carbon emission?
Optimisation of carbon reduction, minimised environmental impact and increase in building life-cycle
For example, how well has the building design integrated passive design features such as verandas, courtyards, semi-open spaces, facades with shading devices, etc., incorporated greenery in buildings to enhance the internal environment; adopted green building practices; and used renewable energy resources?
How sustainable is the Court Complex in terms of using advanced technology to implement smart building management systems?
Energy-conscious design through use of advanced technology for smart building management systems
For example, how sustainable is the building in terms of implementing smart building controls such as sensors, dimmable energy efficient task lighting and individually controlled HVAC systems?
How sustainable is the Court Complex in terms of adopting measures that ensure a longer life-cycle of the building post occupancy?
Adoption of measures to ensure longer life-cycle of the buildings post occupancy
For example, How sustainable is the Court Complex in terms of increasing its life cycle through adoption of re-use and retrofitting, post occupancy?
How sustainable is the waste management practices in the Court Complex?
Adoption of sustainable waste management practices
For example, how sustainable is the waste management system in terms of recycling of old records, disposal of sanitary/medical waste and garbage, and disposal/recycling of old or broken furniture and equipment?
For example, How well has the building design and construction practices been responsive to local cultural context in terms of conveying an identity through building style, local materials and use of architectural elements
For example, how well has the building design integrated passive design features such as verandas, Courtyards, semi-open spaces, facades with shading devices, etc., incorporated greenery in buildings to enhance the internal environment; adopted green building practices; and used renewable energy resources?
How sustainable are the site planning practices to achieve optimisation of existing structures and the physical geography and natural resources of the site?
For example, how well are the existing buildings repurposed and retrofitted to optimise their use? How well is the building layout planned to achieve least impact on the site’s ecological resources, including maintaining site contours and views; preserving existing natural features and habitats; conserving eco-sensitive zones; and preventing soil erosion when applicable?
No.
Space with Image for
reference
Audit Checklist
Current situation
Recommendation
Access Points and Entrances
1.1. No. of Entrances to the site (vehicular, pedestrian)
1.2. No. of Segregated Entry Points at the site entrance (judges, advocates, litigants, accused, staff, service, etc.)
1.3. Are the access routes from the entrance of the site or parking to the building entrances accessible with clear width, accessible pathways, signages, lighting, etc.
1.4. Is the location of the entrance visible from the pathways?
As per
PART C, Section 1.2
of the Handbook.
Safety and Security
2.1. Is there baggage, security personnel, and CCTV?
2.2 Is there a room for the security personnel?
2.3. Are the Fire Safety measures as per the guidelines such as fire hydrants and Emergency Exit/Staircase?
2.4. Is there a clear emergency evacuation plan including a fire assembly point, signages, etc?
and
Annexure 3.
Drop off and Pick up, Parking
3.1 Designated Parking (Judges, Advocates, Police, Litigants, Staff, VW, Ambulance)
3.2 Accessible Parking including two-wheeler, four-wheeler, Wheelchair assistive vehicles, cycle, etc.
3.3 Wayfinding, informational and directional Signages
3.4 Outdoor lighting in appropriate locations for pathways and signages near the drop-off and pick up, and parking
PART C, Section 1.3.
Amenities and Public Furniture
4.1 Accessible amenities and their adjacencies to the Court Complex functions including bank, food Stalls, printing/photocopying shop, and post box
4.2 Space and amenities for Notaries
4.3 Accessible and well-maintained Public Toilets, Drinking Water Facility
4.4 Accessible and visible Information Kiosk
4.5 Accessible public furniture
4.6 Hygiene (dustbins, etc.)
PART C, Section 3
Landscape & Pathways
5.1 Accessible features for the outdoor landscape and pathways including tactile pavers, barrier-free, levels, steps/ramps, and signage
5.2 Well-illuminated pathways
5.3 Rainwater Harvesting
PART C, Section 1.4.
1.1. No. of Entrances to the building (Segregated and secure entrance as per user groups including Judges, Vulnerable witnesses, Accused, and Public)
PART C, As per Section 1.2.B
Section 1.4.
2.3 Are the Fire Safety measures as per the guidelines such as fire hydrants and Emergency Exit/Staircase
Amenities
3.1 Are the information desk, information kiosks, and signages visible from the entrance?
3.2 Are the lifts and staircase easily accessible from the entrance?
3.3 Are there assistive aids accessible for diverse user groups including tactile pavers, tactile signages, audio assistance, wheelchairs, etc?
3.4 Is there a waiting area near the entrance? Is the waiting area attached with amenities including accessible public toilets, drinking water facilities, a child care area, a quiet room, a play area for kids, case information, etc?
3.5 Are there segregated waiting areas?
3.6 Is there furniture for different stakeholders including advocates, litigants, visitors, etc., Are the furniture accessible/ergonomically suitable?
PART C, Section 2.2.
1.1. Are there Segregated and secure entrances as per user groups including Judges, Vulnerable witnesses, Accused, Advocates, and Public?
1.2. Is the entrance accessible with a clear door width for diverse user groups?
1.2 Is the spatial arrangement of the Courtroom as per zones? Are there evident vision lines for the Judge towards the entrance, accused, witness, advocates table, media, and litigants?
PART C, Section 2.1
Annexure 6.
2.1. Are there provisions for security in the Courtroom?
2.2. Are the Fire Safety measures as per the guidelines such as fire hydrants and Emergency Exit/Staircase?
2.3. Is there a clear emergency evacuation plan including a fire assembly point, signages, etc?
Amenities and Furniture
3.1 Is there furniture for different stakeholders ?
3.2 Considering the raised level of the dias and the witness and accused box are they accessible including clear width of the entrance, and provision for a ramp, etc?
3.3 Are the furniture accessible/ergonomically suitable?
3.4 Are the storage units sufficient and efficient?
3.5 Is the spatial design and furniture arrangement accommodating clear and accessible Aisle Space, Ramps, tactile pavers, Signage, Step, Handrail
PART C, Section 2.1.
Ventilation, Acoustics & Lighting
4.1 Is there sufficient Natural Lighting and ventilation?
4.2 Are the artificial lighting efficiently used in the Courtroom?
4.3 Are there AC Units?
4.4 Are there windows? Are there barriers in front of the windows?
4.5 Is there controlled acoustics?
Annexure 5.
Hygiene
5.1 Does the room have dustbins?
5.2 Is the waste segregated ?
5.3 Is there an efficient waste management plan?
5.4 Is the room well-maintained?
3.1.C.
Digital Technology
6.1 Are the digital infrastructure including computers, video conferencing Facilities (Mic, Camera, screens, printers, etc.)?
6.2 Are the Electrical Points easily accessible?
6.3 Is there an Internet Connection?
6.4 Are there functioning Case Display Systems? Are these at accessible heights?
PART C and PART D, Section 4.2.
SPECIAL COURTS
POCSO Court and VWDC
7.1 Are there separate entry doors for different stakeholders including judges, staff, advocates, litigants, child victims, etc.?
7.2 Does the POCSO Court have video conferencing facilities?
7.3 Is the interior of the POCSO Court designed differently than from a conventional Court?
7.4 Are there descriptive Aid, testimonial Aid (screens, live links, image/voice altering devices)
7.5 Is there a separate waiting area attached to the POCSO Court with required facilities including vending machine, drinking water, family friendly toilets, toys/books/television, signages/fliers/infographics (in local language)
7.6 Is the Courtroom and paths leading to the Courtroom designed to avoid confrontation between the accused and the witness?
7.7 Is there Separate CCTV camera ?
7.8 Is there a screen/partition/one-way mirror between the child and the accused?
7.9 Is there adequate seating space for support personnel such as psychologists/interpreters/etc?
PART C, Section 2.1.B
2.3.
1.1 Is there a separate entry for Judges from outside?
1.2 Is there a separate entry for Judges from the Courtroom?
1.3 Is there a separate entry for Judges from the judges' corridor?
1.4 Is the entrance accessible with a clear door width, if there is a level difference, does it have a ramp, colour contrast for the stairs, tactile pavers, signage, handrail, etc.?
PART C, Section 1.2.B(I).
2.1 Is there sufficient Natural Lighting and ventilation?
2.2 Are the artificial lighting efficiently used in the Courtroom?
2.3 Are there AC Units?
2.4 Are there windows? Are there barriers in front of the windows?
2.5 Is there controlled acoustics?
PART C, Section 2.4.
3.1 Is there furniture for different stakeholders including judges and staff ?
3.2 Are the furniture accessible / ergonomically suitable?
3.3 Are the storage units sufficient and efficient?
3.4 Is the spatial design and furniture arrangement accommodating clear and accessible aisle space, Ramps, tactile pavers, Signage, Step, Handrail where required.
PART C, Section 2.4
4.1 Does the room have dustbins?
4.2 Is the waste segregated ?
4.3 Is there an efficient waste management plan?
4.4 Is the room well-maintained?
As per PART C,
Section 2.4
3.1.
5.1 Are the digital infrastructure including computers,printers, etc ?
5.2 Are the Electrical Points easily accessible?
5.3 Is there an Internet Connection?
Any IT Provisions
6.1. Is the judge's chamber secure and has secure judges corridor?
6.2. Are the Fire Safety measures as per the guidelines such as fire hydrants?
6.3. Is there a clear emergency evacuation plan including a fire assembly point, signages, etc?
Section 1.2.B (I)
1.1 Are there office rooms? How many “administrative” posts for which separate offices are required?
1.2 What are the adjacencies and to which other office rooms?
1.3 Is the entrance accessible with a clear door width, if there is a level difference, does it have a ramp, colour contrast for the stairs, tactile pavers, signage, handrail, etc.?
PART C, Section 1.2.B (II)
2.1 Is there furniture for different stakeholders including staff, advocates and litigants?
2.2 Are the amenities and furniture sufficient for the no. of people engaging with the space?
2.3 Are the furniture accessible/ergonomically suitable?
2.4 Are the storage units sufficient and efficient?
2.5 Is the spatial design and furniture arrangement accommodating clear and accessible Aisle Space, Ramps, tactile pavers, Signage, Step, Handrail?
2.6. Is the furniture well-maintained?
PART C, Section 2.5.
3.1 Is there sufficient Natural Lighting and ventilation?
3.2 Are the artificial lighting efficiently used in the Courtroom?
3.3 Are there AC Units?
3.4 Are there windows? Are there barriers in front of the windows?
3.5 Is there controlled acoustics?
PART C, Section 2.5
4.2 Is the waste segregated?
PART C, Section 3.1.C.
5.1 Are the digital infrastructure including computers,printers, etc?
6.1. Are the administrative offices secure and have secure corridors?
Toilets
1.1 Are there sufficient toilets?
1.2 Is the location of the toilet accessible. Is the toilet easily identifiable with directional and informative signages?
1.3 Are there toilets for diverse user groups including family toilets, gender neutral toilets, gender-neutral toilets, accessible toilets, ambulant toilets, etc.?
1.4. Are the toilets hygienic and well maintained?
1.5 Do the toilets have other provisions including a baby diaper changing unit, child care/ feeding room, etc.?
1.6 Does the toilet have dustbins?
1.7 Is the waste segregated?
1.8 Is there an efficient waste management plan?
1.9 Are there accessible features including accessible heights, accessible entrance with clear door widths, grab bars, etc?
1.10 Is the toilet functional and maintained well?
PART C, Section 3.1.
Drinking Water
2.1 Are there sufficient drinking water facilities??
2.2 Is the drinking water facility easily identifiable with directional and informative signages??
2.3 Is there provision for drinking water facilities??
2.4 Are the drinking water facility at accessible heights??
2.5 Is the drinking water facility hygienic and well maintained??
PART C, Section 3.2.
Corridor
1.1 Are there any obstructions in the clear width?
1.2 Are the adequate and efficient signage system, signage, accessible furniture (plants, benches, chairs), case display system, notice boards, biometric system, fire safety system, etc.?
1.2 Are there efficiently designed Light & Ventilation, Security Provisions, Proximity to Drinking Water, Public Toilets, Electric Points?
PART C, Section 1.4.B.
Lift
2.1 Is there a waiting area outside the lift?
2.2 Are there accessible features including tactile pavers leading up to the lift, accessible height for the control panel?
2.3. Are the door width of clear accessible with with appropriate opening and closing time?
2.4 Does the Car/Cage have mirror, guard rail, call buttons?
2.5 Are there audible announcements in the lift?
2.6 Are the lift accessible to diverse user groups?
2.7 Are there sufficient lifts in the Court Complex?
2.8 Are there segregated lifts for diverse user groups including witness, accused, judges, general public?
2.9 Are the designated and secured lifts for accused and vulnerable witness avoiding confrontation?
PART C, Section 1.5.B.
Staircase
3.1 Are the height of the riser and width of tread of accessible and of appropriate dimension?
3.2 Are the staircase accessible to diverse user groups?
3.3 Are there sufficient staircase in the Court Complex?
3.4 Are there segregated staircase for diverse user groups including witness, accused, judges, general public?
3.5. Are the designated and secured staircase for accused and vulnerable witness avoiding confrontation?
3.6 Are the staircase accessible with colour contrast, tactile pavers, handrails, signage etc.?
3.7 Are the staircase hygienic, well lit and ventilated, secure and fire safety compliant?
PART C, Section 1.5.A.
Waiting/Lobby Area
4.1 Are there furnitures for different stakeholders including advocates, litigants and visitors?
4.2 Are they accessible for diverse user groups including family friendly and child friendly facilities?
4.3 Are the furniture accessible/ergonomically suitable?
4.4 Are there efficiently designed Light & Ventilation, Security Provisions, Proximity to Drinking Water, Public Toilets, Electric Points?
SPECIAL SPACES
POCSO Court and VWDC waiting area
5.1 Are there separate entry doors for different stakeholders including judges, staff, advocates, litigants, child victims and family, etc.?
5.2 Is the interior of the POCSO Court and VWDC waiting room designed differently than from a conventional Court?
5.3 Are there descriptive Aid, testimonial Aid (screens, live links, image/voice altering devices)?
5.4 Is there a separate waiting area attached to the POCSO Court and VWDC waiting room with required facilities including vending machine, drinking water, family friendly toilets, toys/books/television, signages/fliers/infographics (in local language)?
5.5 Is the pathway leading to the waiting area and Courtroom designed to avoid confrontation between the accused and the witness?
5.6 Is there adequate seating space for support personnel such as psychologists/interpreters/etc.?
PART C, Section 2.2.B
And
1.1 Are there ancillary rooms?
1.2 Are the adjacencies organised efficiently?
1.3 Is the entrance accessible with a clear door width, if there is a level difference, does it have ramps, colour contrasts for the stairs, tactile pavers, signage, handrail, etc.?
PART C, Section 2.9.
2.1 Is there furniture for different stakeholders?
2.6. Are the furniture well-maintained?
PART C, Section 2.9
6.1. Are the Fire Safety measures as per the guidelines such as fire hydrants?
6.2. Is there a clear emergency evacuation plan including a fire assembly point, signages, etc?
PART D, Section 4.2.
Provisions and designs
1.1 Are there sufficient support services including creche, play areas for kids, medical rooms, emergency room?
PART C, Section 3.3.
Creche/Diaper Change Room
2.1 Is there a play area in the creche/outside?
2.2 Are there facilities for children to sleep?
2.4 Is there a first-aid kit in the creche?
2.5 Is there play equipment available in the creche?
2.6 Is the creche room child friendly, well lit and ventilated?
2.7 Are there furniture child friendly with appropriate heights as per age groups?
2.8 Are the emergency exits clearly marked?
2.9 Does the creche have attached child friendly toilets/washroom facilities?
2.10 Do the toilet facilities meet the standards for children? Are they well maintained?
2.11 Is there controlled acoustics?
Prayer Room
3.1 Are the prayer hall designed to accommodate sufficient people as per standards?
3.2 Are there separate gender-based prayer rooms?
3.3 Is there a designated area for removing and keeping/storing shoes/footwear?
3.4 Is there access to the wash area (ablution) before entering the prayer area?
3.5 Are there toilet facilities nearby?
3.6 Is there controlled acoustics in the prayer hall?
PART C, Section 3.5.
