Evidence via video conference not permissible, says Supreme Court

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday disallowed recording of evidence by a family court in matrimonial proceedings through video conference when either the husband or the wife is unable to attend the court in person.

A three-judge bench of Chief Justice and justice A.M. Kanwilkar by a majority of 2:1 over-ruled an earlier decision by two judges allowing video conference evidence. Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, however, disagreed with the CJI and said it could be permitted.

In his order, the CJI said, “If both the parties are present in court, one party can communicate with other, if they are left alone for some time. This is not possible in video conferencing and if possible, it is very doubtful whether the emotional bond can be established in a virtual meeting during video conferencing. Video conferencing may create a dent in the process of settlement. The bench noted that the hearing of matrimonial disputes may have to be conducted in- camera and video conferencing would prevent such in camera hearing.”

The CJI said in the guise of video conferencing the family court judge should neither be a slave to the concept of speedy settlement nor should he be a serf to the proclivity of hurried disposal abandoning the inherent purity of justice dispensation system.’  The bench said  “constitutional identity”, “freedom of choice”, “dignity of a woman”, “affirmative rights conferred on her by the Constitution” cannot be allowed to be abrogated even for a moment.

The bench said reconciliation requires the presence of both the parties at the same place and the same time so as to be effectively conducted. The spatial distance will distant the possibility of reconciliation because the family court judge would not be in a position to interact with the parties in the manner as the law commands. Needless to emphasize, this commands a sense of trust and maintaining an atmosphere of confidence and also a requirement of assurance that the confidentiality is in no way averted or done away with.

Justice Chandrachud, however, said this court must be averse to judicially laying down a restraint on such use of technology, which facilitates access to justice to persons in conflict, including those, involved in conflicts within the family. Modern technology is all a facilitator, enabler and leveler. Video conferencing is a technology, which allows users in different locations to hold face-to-face meetings. Video conferencing is being used extensively the world over (India being no exception) in online teaching, administration, meetings, negotiation, mediation, and telemedicine among a myriad other use. Video conferencing reduces cost, time, carbon footprint and the like.