Devan Ramachandran, J.

The petitioner challenges Ext.P6 order of the learned Family Court, Muvattupuzha, since it has rejected her application, namely I.A.No.12/2025 in O.P.No.33/2021, wherein she sought permission to adduce evidence through Video Conference. 2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner – Sri.Philip T.

Varghese, pointed out that his client is working abroad and is unable to appear before the Court physically; and that it is, therefore, that she moved the application seeking the afore prayer. He then made an alternative plea that if this Court is not inclined, then his client may be given six months' time to appear before the Court to give evidence, because she is otherwise not in a position to appear on account of her professional / employment commitments.

3. We have examined Ext.P6 and notice that the application filed by the petitioner in the Original Petition - which has also been filed by her seeking divorce against the respondent - is solely that she be allowed to adduce evidence through video conference. The learned Court has, however, disallowed her plea only because she is stated to be an accused in a case registered against her under the provisions of the Prote