JUDGMENT

Variava, J.-Leave granted.

2. Heard parties.

3. These Appeals are against a judgment of the Bombay High Court dated 23rd/24th April 2001. The question for consideration is whether in a criminal trial, evidence can be recorded by video conferencing. The High Court has held, on an interpretation of Section 273, Criminal Procedure Code, that it cannot be done. Criminal Appeal (arising out of SLP (Criminal) No. 6814 of 2001) is filed by the State of Maharashtra. Criminal Appeal (arising out of SLP (Criminal) No. 6815 of 2001) is filed by Mr. P.C. Singh, who was the complainant. As the question of law is common in both these Appeals, they are being disposed of by this common judgment. In this judgment parties will be referred to in their capacity in the Criminal Appeal (arising out of SLP (Criminal) No. 6814 of 2001). Mr. P.C. Singh will be referred to as the complainant.

4. Briefly stated the facts are as follows :

The complainant s wife was suffering from terminal cancer. It is the case of the prosecution that the complainant s wife was examined by Dr. Ernest Greenberg of Sloan Kettering Memorial Hospital, New York, USA, who opined that she was inoperable and should be treated onl