The duty of the petitioner to supply correct addresses of the witnesses and the Family Court's jurisdiction to direct the petitioner to serve the witnesses by dasti process.

V.K. Bist, J.

Present petition has been filed by the petitioner for the following reliefs:

“(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 21.11.2011 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Dehradun in Suit No.238 of 2011 “Vineet Kumar Jain Vs. Archana Garg” pending before the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Dehradun directing the petitioner to serve the summons on witnesses by dasti process.

(b) Issue a writ, order or direction, directing to allow application No.161 C of the petitioner and Principal Judge, Family Court, Dehradun be directed to summon witnesses Sri S.K. Nandal & Smt. Kirti Jain through Court, in Suit No.238 of 2008 “Vineet Kumar Jain Vs. Archana Garg”.

(c) Issue any other order or direction, which this Hon’ble High Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

(d) To award cost of the petition to the petitioner.”

2. Brief facts of the case, as narrated in the writ petition, are that on 21.05.2008 respondent filed petition under Section 13 & 10 of the Hindu Marriage Act before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Dehradun, which was registered as Original Suit No.238 of 2008 “Vineet Kumar Jain Vs. Smt. Archana Garg”. Petitioner appeared before the Family Court, Dehradun and filed her written statement and contended that petition filed by the respondent was misuse of process of law. On 06.01.2011, issues were framed in the aforesaid suit and thereafter, case was fixed for respondent’s evidence. Thereafter, on 04.03.2011 additional issues were framed in the suit. 09.05.2011 was the first date fixed for petitioner’s evidence. List of witness was submitted. It is alleged that two witnesses, namely, Sri S.K. Nandal & Smt. Kirti Jain, apart from other witnesses, are not under the control of the petitioner. Shri S.K. Nandal is working in the same office in which the respondent is working and Smt. Kirti Jain is the sister of the respondent. On 28.03.2011, when the respondent was being cross examined before the Court below, he leveled specific allegation against the petitioner that petitioner-Smt. Archana Jain was having illicit relationship with Shri S.K. Nandal, who is colleague of the respondent. Respondent stated that the petitioner used to misbehave with his sister-Smt. Kirti Jain and she used to abuse his sister. It is alleged that both the above-referred witnesses, namely, Shri S.K Nandal and Smt. Kirti Jain are crucial witnesses and their evidence would have great impact on the matter. Shri S.K. Nandal is presently posted at Assam and Smt. Kirti Jain is residing at Delhi and request was made to issue summons upon aforesaid witnesses at their respective places through Court. On 16.11.2011, the learned Presiding Officer, Principal Judge, Family Court, Dehradun, while fixing the matter for 24.11.2011, ordered the petitioner to serve the summons on witnesses by dasti process. Thereafter, petitioner filed application no.161 C before the Court below praying therein that the summons may be issued to the witnesses, through Court. The purpose for which the witnesses are sought to be summoned was also disclosed in that application and it was also stated in the application that the witnesses are under the control of respondent. On 31.03.2011, similar prayer was made by the respondent at the time of his evidence and the same Court, after recording a finding that since the witnesses are not under the control of respondent, the same be summoned, through Court. The respondent did not file any objections against application no.161 C and endorsed his contention/ objection on the application itself. On 21.11.2011, the Principal Judge, Family Court, Dehradun dismissed the application no.161 C. Aggrieved by the order dated 21.11.2011 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Dehradun in Suit No.238 of 2011 “Vineet Kumar Jain Vs. Archana Garg”, present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner.

3. Shri Neeraj Garg, learned coun