Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
SUDEEPTI SHARMA
Kulwant Singh – Appellant
Versus
Jaswinder Kaur – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sudeepti Sharma, J.
The present revision has been filed for setting aside order dated 11.11.2021 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Batala vide which application under Section 151 Code of Civil Procedure , 1908 for examining respondent No.2 Balwinder Singh and respondent No.3 Manjit Singh through video conferencing has been allowed.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Batala has wrongly allowed the application filed by respondent No.2 and 3 by relying upon medical record of respondent No.2 Balwinder Singh, which is not authenticated. He further contends that despite the fact that both respondent No.2 and 3 were declared proclaimed offenders, learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Batala allowed the application for examining them through video conferencing. Further that learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Batala failed to appreciate that to facilitate the respondents No.2 and 3 who are proclaimed offenders to join proceedings through video conferencing would amount to avoid criminal prosecution against them.
3. He relied upon the judgment passed by the Karnataka High Court in T.G. Veeraprasad and others
The court confirmed video conferencing for evidence recording aligns with modern judicial practices despite legal challenges on witness presence.
Judicial endorsement of video conferencing for evidence collection is mandated, emphasizing modern practices should not be obstructed by technicalities.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the necessity of responding to the call of social distancing and ensuring the sanctity of testimony through video conferencing, in line with the gu....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the permissibility of dispensing with the physical presence of the accused during trial and allowing appearance through video conferencing, in line....
The court upheld the trial Court's decision to allow witness statements via ordinary video conferencing, emphasizing accessibility and the need for justice without undue hardship.
The court affirmed the right of a plaintiff in custody to present evidence via video conferencing, emphasizing the importance of access to justice.
The statement of an overseas witness can be recorded through video conferencing, as per the guidelines laid down by the court for the conduct of court proceedings between courts and remote sites.
The power under S.311 Cr.P.C. should be exercised to ensure a just decision and the best available evidence should be brought before the Court. Respect for time limits set by higher courts is crucial....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
