$~21 to 23 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CONT.CAS(C) 745/2019 & CM APPL. 11774/2021 PARUL JAIN .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Ramakant Sharma, and Mr.

Prateek Avasthi, Advs.

versus PANKAJ JAIN .....Respondent Through: Respondent (through VC)

22 CONT.CAS(C) 749/2019 PARUL JAIN .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Ramakant Sharma, and Mr.

Prateek Avasthi, Advs.

versus PANKAJ JAIN .....Respondent Through: Respondent (through VC)

23 + CONT.CAS(C) 411/2021 PARUL JAIN .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Ramakant Sharma, and Mr.

Prateek Avasthi, Advs.

versus PANKAJ JAIN .....Respondent Through: Respondent (through VC)

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE

O R D E R

% 12.12.2025 CM APPL. 65272/2025 (By respondent seeking correction/modification of order dated 17.09.2025) in CONT.CAS(C) 745/2019

1. Despite specific order dated 17.09.2025, Mr. Pankaj Jain, respondent is once again appearing in person through video conferencing.

He has filed the present application seeking correction/ modification of the said order for recording accurately the proceedings and for permitting him to attend the proceedings through video conferencing.

2. Primarily, the reasons set out by the respondent in the present application to allow him to appear through video conferencing are as follows:

“a. This Hon’ble is passing the aforesaid directions based on false and misleading submissions of the Petitioner.

b. The Respondent’s child is a victim in a criminal case under a special act for protection of children. The Respondent has been given the charge of the child who has been designated as a child in need of care and protection. The Respondent has been given the responsibility of protection, education and health of the child. The Petitioner and her brother are the main accused in that matter, and have been trying to approach the child (victim) and harass her. If the Respondent has to physically come to the court, then it would make it difficult for him to discharge his duties (such as picking the child from her school) and the child also would feel nervous.

c. The Respondent has been engaged in full time voluntary work wherein he is providing a health care solution, that significantly improves the treatment of children affected by a disease called clubfoot. This solution is being provided free of cost by the Respondent to several clinics in India and other countries of the world. The Respondent also supports the treatment of such children by physically visiting some of these clinics or through the online medium. Whenever, the Respondent is required to come to the court, it makes it very difficult for the Respondent to provide this support, and consequently the children do not get the best possible treatment. d. The Petitioner has the habit of filing numerous false and frivolous cases against the Respondent and reviving disposed of matters, only so that the Respondent is dragged to the court and harassed. On many occasions, the Respondent has had to come to the courts and wait for the entire day, for no just cause or reason.

f. Therefore the Respondent requested this Hon’ble Court to allow him to appear through VC, but this Hon’ble Court was unwilling to accede to the request. At this point, the Respondent cited the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sarvesh Mathur v. The Registrar General High Court of Punjab and Haryana [2023INSC891]:

14. In this backdrop, we issue the following directions:

(i) After a lapse of two weeks from the date of this order, no High Court shall deny access to video conferencing facilities or hearing through the hybrid mode to any member of the Bar or litigant desirous of availing of such a facility;

(iv) The links available for accessing video conferencing/ hybrid hearings shall be made available in the daily cause- list of each court and there shall be no requirement of making prior applications. No High Court shall impose an age requirement or any other arbitrary criteria for availing of virtual/hybrid hearings;

The judgement in Sarversh Mathur