The Karnataka High Court has relaxed a rule stating that remote testimony outside the country must be done from an Indian embassy or consulate, while hearing an application related to a case of cruelty and unnatural sex filed by a woman against her husband.
The order, passed by Justice Sachin Shankar Maghadom on September 22, became available to the public recently.
The woman had filed a case under sections of the Indian Penal Code that deal with cruelty and unnatural sexual offences, as well as sections of the Information Technology Act. The police filed an indictment against her husband. It approached the Supreme Court seeking relaxation of Rule 5.3.1 of the Video Conferencing Rules for participation in proceedings from abroad, since this rule provides for a remote point coordinator who is an official of an embassy, consulate or high commission.
The relaxation was sought because the embassy and consular facilities of India in the United States (where the woman resides) do not have working hours that match the working hours of the courts in India. Therefore, she requested permission to isolate from her home.
Her lawyer said that this rule should not be insisted on because she is not an accused, but rather the complainant in the case. Apart from arguing that she should have approached the lower court instead of the Supreme Court, the husband’s counsel said there was apprehension that communication would be cut off during interrogation, especially when crucial questions were asked of the woman, thus damaging his case.
The woman’s lawyer argued against that concern, noting that half of the examination had already gone smoothly via virtual means, and adding that she was prepared to pledge not to disconnect during the deposition on pain of ignoring her evidence.
Keeping this undertaking in mind, the court ruled in favor of the woman, saying: “In view of the special circumstances of the case, and the practical difficulty faced by the petitioner in availing the facilities of the Embassy due to mismatch of working hours between the Embassy and the Indian Courts, this Court is of the view that the examination-in-chief and cross-examination of the petitioner/complainant may be permitted through direct video conferencing from her residence in the United States.”
(tags for translation) Deposition of a woman against her husband
