Compliance with prevailing COVID SOPs and granting opportunities for completing evidence.

JUDGMENT

1. The instant misc. appeal has been preferred by the appellant Smt. Sarita being aggrieved of the order dated 15.07.2021 passed by the Judge, Family Court, Hanumangarh in Misc. Civil Case No.162/2017 whereby, the learned Family Court, rejected the application filed by the appellant for summoning one Sahab Ram as a witness on her behalf and also closed her evidence. The appellant has also challenged the order dated 31.07.2021 whereby, the application for reopening the evidence has been rejected.

2. We have heard and considered the submissions advanced at bar and have gone through the impugned orders.

3. Learned counsel Shri Harishit Bhurani representing the appellant urged that the appellant does not insist that the witness Sahab Ram should be summoned by the Family Court to give evidence in her support. But as per him, the direction to close the evidence of the appellant is contrary to the COVID SOPs prevailing at the relevant point of time because the High Court had prohibited all the subordinate courts of the State of Rajasthan from recording evidence by restrictions which were lifted from 31.07.2021. Thus, the closure of the evidence of the appellant by the learned Family Court, even though a prohibition for examining the witnesses was prevailing, is contrary to the prevailing guidelines issued by the High Court. On these grounds, Shri Bhurani implored the Court to accept the appeal, set aside the impugned orders and reopen the evidence of the appellant.

4. Per contra, learned counsel Shri Kuldeep Mathur and Shri Kshamendra Mathur representing the respondents, vehemently and fervently opposed the submissions advanced by the appellant's counsel. However, they too are not in a position to dispute the fact that the High Court had issued the SOPs whereby, all the subordinate courts of State of Rajasthan had been directed not to summon witnesses for recording evidence. This restriction was lifted on 31.07.2021. Thus, there cannot be any justification for closure of the evidence of the appellant by the Family Court on 15.07.2021 on which date, the recording of evidence was otherwise not permissible.

5. Even presently, the restrictions have been imposed by the High Court directing all the subordinate courts of State of Rajasthan not to summon the witnesses for recording of the evidence.

6. In this background, the impugned orders dated 15.07.2021 and 31.07.2021 passed by the Judge, Family Court, Hanumangarh in Misc. Civil Case No.162/2017 are quashed and set aside. It is hereby directed that after the aforesaid restrictions are lifted, the appellant shall be granted two opportunities for completing her evidence. However, it is made clear that the Family Court shall not be under an obligation to summon the witness Sahab Ram in evidence on behalf of the appellant who shall be at liberty to examine him with her own effort, if so desired.

7. The appeal is allowed in these terms. Stay application is disposed of.