LexSANTHINI versus VIJAYA VENKETESH
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2017] 12 S.C.R. 557 SANTHINI v. VIJAYA VENKETESH (Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 1278of2016) OCTOBER 09, 2017 [DIPAK MISRA, CJI, A. M. KHANWILKAR AND DR. D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, JJ.] Family Law - Matrimonial dispute - Video conferencing - Permissibility - In view of the scheme of the 1984 Act and in particular s. ll, the hearing of matrimonial disputes may have to be conducted in camera - Once a settlement fails and if both the parties give consent that a witness can be examined in video conferencing, A B c that can be allowed - That apart, when they give consent that it is necessary in a specific factual matrix having regard to the convenience of the parties, the Family Court may allow ·the prayer D for video coriferencing - That much of discretion can be conferred on the Family Court - Such a limited discretion will not run counter to the legislative intention that permeates the 1984 Act - However, as a safeguard, a joint application should be filed before the F amity Court Judge, who shall take a decision - However, in a transfer petition, no direction can be issued for video conferencing - The discretion has to rest with the Family Court to be exercised after the court arrives at a definite conclusion that the settlement is not possible and both parties file a joint application or each party filing his/her consent memorandum seeking hearing by video conferencing - These directions shall apply prospectively- Fami(y Courts Act, 1984 - s.11 - Constitution of India - Art.139A(2) - Transfer Petition. (Dipak Misra, CJ! for himself and for A.M Khanwilkm; .!.) Family Courts Act, 1984 - s.11 - Jn camera proceedings - Importance of - Whether rights of woman would scuttle when matrimonial disputes are conducted through video conferencing - Held: The "constitutional identity", "freedom of choice", "dignity of a woman" and "affirmative rights conferred on woman by the Constitution" cannot be allowed to be abrogated even for a moment - s.11 of 1984 Act mandates the proceedings to be held in camera if one of the parties so desires - Equality_of choice has been conferred 557 E F G 558 A B c D E F G H SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2017] 12 S.C.R. by the statute - That apart, s.22 of the 1955 Act lays down the proceedings to be held in camera and any matter in relation to any such proceeding may not be printed or published except a judgment of the High Court or of the Supreme Court with the previous permission of the Court - The expression of desire by the wife or the husband is whittled down and smothered if the Court directs that the proceedings shall be conducted through the use of video conferencing - To say that if one party makes the request, the proceedings may be conducted by video conferencing mode, would be contrary to the language employed under .d I of the 1984 Act - The said provision is in consonance with the constitutional provision which confer affirmative rights on women that cannot be negatived by the Court- Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - s.22. (Dipak Misra, CJ! for himself and for A.M. Khanwilka1; J.) Family Courts Act, 1984 - s.11 - In camera proceedings - Gender equality - s.11 provides that if one of the parties desires that the proceedings should be held in camera, the Family Court has no option but to so direct - Such a sanctified right cannot be taken away by courts which law recognizes either for the wife or the husband.(Dipak Misra, CJ! for himself and for A. M. Khanwilkm; J.) F amity Courts Act, 1984 - s.11 - Role/duties of Family Court Judge - The Family Court Judge is expected to be absolutely sensitive and has to take stock of the situation and can suo motu hold the proceedings in camera - The Family Court Judge is only meant to deal with the controversies and disputes as provided under the 1984 Act - He is not to be given any other assignment by the High Court - The in camera proceedings stand in contradistinction to a proceeding which is tried in court - When a case is tried or heard in court, there is absolute transparenGy - Having regard to the nature of the controversy and the sensitivity of the matter, it is desirable to hear in court various types of issues that crop up in these types of litigations - A Family Court Judge has to be very sensitive to the cause before it and he/she should be conscious about timely delineation and not procrastinate the matter as delay has the potentiality to breed bitterness that eventually cor
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.