Uttarakhand HC Permits US-Based Wife To Record Evidence Via Video Conferencing In Matrimonial Dispute, Stresses Effective Use Of VC Rules

A bench of Justice Manoj Kumar Tiwari and Justice Vivek Bharti Sharma also directed all the courts within the State to ensure the effective use of High Court Video Conferencing Rules 2020 as and when necessary.

Furthermore, the Court also directed that a copy of its judgment be sent to the Director, Uttarakhand Judicial and Legal Academy, within six months, to make it part of the curriculum of Induction Training and refreshers courses for all the judges of the District courts of the States.

The bench passed this order while allowing an appeal filed by Madhuri Joshi, presently residing in San Franciso (USA), challenging a Dehradun family court's order whereby her plea for recording her evidence by videoconference mode was effectively rejected.

She had prayed for recording her evidence via VC mode, claiming that she was out of India and could not come to India for her evidence because of the nature of her job.

On the other hand, the husband submitted that a Coordinate Bench of the HC has already allowed the appellant-wife to appear through Video-Conferencing before the concerned Family Court for the evidence.

Against the backdrop of these submissions, the bench, at the outset, noted that while the Coordinate Bench had effectively granted the relief, the wife's appeal was not finally disposed of.

The Court further noted that the HC has already notified 'High Court of Uttarakhand Video Conferencing Rules-2020', whose Rule 3(i) provides that the video conferencing facilities may be used at all stages of judicial proceedings and proceedings conducted by the Court.

Referring to the family court's order, the bench observed that by directing the appellant-wife to appear in person, the concerned court effectively disallowed the application of the appellant-wife without giving any reason for getting her examined as a witness in her defence.

In fact, the Court also termed it 'surprising' that the family court had fixed a lump sum of 10,000/—for the expenditures of the whole journey of the appellant wife from the U.S.A. to appear in the concerned court.

“In the opinion of this Court a lump sump amount of `10,000/- for travelling from San Francisco to Dehradun and staying here in India is very meagre amount,” the bench remarked in its order.

Thus, the impugned order was set aside, and the wife's appeal and application to record her evidence in defence through Videoconferencing were allowed.

Case title - Madhuri Joshi vs. Shashank Balooni

Case citation :

ClickHere To Read/Download the Order