##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision : 27.08.2026 DALJITINDER KAUR @ DALJIT INDER ARORA ...PETITIONER Versus AMARINDER SINGH BRAR AND ORS. ...RESPONDENTS CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA Present: Mr. A.S. Narang, Advocate for the petitioner.

*****

DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA, J. (Oral)

1. The present revision petition has been filed against the order dated 03.07.2026 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Trial Court, whereby the application filed by the petitioner-plaintiff seeking permission to record her evidence through video conferencing, has been dismissed.

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that a perusal of the impugned order dated 03.07.2026 (Annexure P-1) would show that the Trial Court has dismissed the abovesaid application primarily on the ground that no medical certificate was furnished by the petitioner-plaintiff to show her inability to appear before the Trial Court and, as such, there was no sufficient cause to establish for securing exemption from her personal appearance. Learned counsel submits that, while passing the impugned order dated 03.07.2026 (Annexure P-1), the Trial Court failed to take into consideration the Video Conferencing Rules (in short ‘the Rules’) (Annexure P-9) framed by the High Court in exercise of the powers conferred under Articles 225 and 227 of the Constitution of India, governing the conduct of judicial proceedings through electronic means. It is also the case of learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner-plaintiff is aged about 72 years and is suffering from Arthritis and has been advised knee replacement. The medical certificate in this regard has been placed on record as Annexure P-4 with the present petition. Learned counsel has particularly referred to Rule 8.15 of the aforesaid Rules, which contemplates recording of evidence through video conferencing where the required person is unable to reach the Court Point or the Remote Point on account of sickness or physical infirmity, or where his/her presence cannot be secured without undue delay or expense. The relevant provisions of the Rules have been reproduced hereunder:-

“Examination of persons

8.1 Any person being examined, including a witness shall, before being examined through video conferencing, produce and file proof of identity by submitting an identity document issued ar duly recognized by the Government of India. State Government, Union Territory, or in the absence of such a document, an affidavit attested by any of the authorities referred to in Section 139 of the CPC or Section 297 of the CrPC, as the case maybe. The affidavit will inter alia state that the person, who is shown to be the party to the proceedings or as a witness, is the same person, who is to depose at the virtual hearing. A copy of the proof of identity or affidavit, as the case may be, will be made available to the opposite party

8.2 The person being examined will ordinarily be examined during the working hours of the concerned Court or at such time as the Court may deem fit. The oath will be administered to the person being examined by the Coordinator are the Court Point.

8.3 Where the person being examined, or the accused to be tried, is in custody, the statement or, as the case may be, the testimony, may be recorded through video conferencing. The Court shall provide adequate opportunity to the under trial prisoner to consult in privacy with their counsel before, during and after the video conferencing.

8.4 Subject to the provisions for examination of witnesses contained in the Evidence Act, before the examination of the witness, the documents, if any, sought to be relied upon shall be transmitted by the applicant to the witness, so that the witness acquires familiarity with the said documents. The applicant will file an acknowledgment with the Court in this behalf.

8.5 If a person is examined with reference to a particular document then the summons t