IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

Reserved on : 30.09.2025

Pronounced on : 22.12.2025

Uploaded on : 22.12.2025

Whether only operative part of the judgment is pronounced? No Whether full judgment is pronounced? Yes

Rachna Srivastava ...... Petitioner

versus

Sanjay Srivastava and another ...... Respondents

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN

Present: Petitioner in person.

Mr. Saurabh Bhatia, Advocate

for respondent No.1.

Mr. Kulwinder Singh, Advocate (through V.C.)

for respondent No.2.

****

PANKAJ JAIN, J.

1. Present revision petition is directed against order dated

01.04.2024 passed by JMIC Gurgaon.

2. The disputes relates to admission of personal diary of the petitioner in evidence. The Trial Court has allowed the diary to be tendered in evidence. The present revision petition has been preferred relying upon ratio of law laid down by Supreme Court in the case of

Vibhor Garg vs. Neha reported as 2025 INSC 829

3. Counsel for the petitioner submits that diary in question being a privileged communication, cannot be allowed to be admitted in evidence in view of the provisions of Section 122 of the Evidence Act, 1872 re-enacted as Section 128 of the Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam,

2023.

4.