Document 2757d28c-1e07-4d5b-9e9a-3b5a20f827b4
- Court
- Gujarat High Court
C/SCA/13677/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 19/10/2026
(GJHC240649802026)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13677 of 2026
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
GAURAVKUMAR VIJAYKUMAR THAKKAR & ANR.
Versus
NA
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR RASHMIN MAKWANA(3758) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI
Date : 19/10/2026
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Draft amendment stands allowed. The same shall be carried out
forthwith.
2. The captioned Special Civil Application is preferred under Articles
226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following reliefs:-
a) To admit and allow this petition;
b) To quash and set aside the order dated 25-3-2026 passed
by the Family Court No.5, Ahmedabad in HMP No.2520 of
2025 vide Exhibit-14;
c) To direct the Family Court No.5, Ahmedabad to record the
deposition of the petitioner No.1 Husband through
WhatsApp call on his mobile number +1(416)561-8010 on
an appropriate date and time convenient to the Family
Page 1 of 7
Uploaded by ARUN B(HC02368) on Fri Oct 23 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 23 10:42:00 IST 2026
C/SCA/13677/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 19/10/2026
(GJHC240649802026)
Court, Ahmedabad;
d) Pass any such other and/or further orders that may be
thought just and proper, in the facts and circumstances of
the present case.
3. The succinct facts, which led to filing the captioned petition is
that the Petitioners herein have filed one petition under Section 13B of
the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking dissolution of marriage by way of
mutual consent. Petitioner No.1 – Husband is residing outside India,
hence, the aforesaid petition came to filed through his power of
attorney. Petitioner No.1 – husband prayed to the learned Family Court
that he cannot appear personally before the Court, as such, he may be
permitted to appear before the Court through Video Conferencing for
recording his examination-in-chief. The said application came to be
allowed by the learned Family Court, however, it is the case of the
Petitioner No.1 – Husband that the learned Family Court had imposed
onerous conditions, which cannot be complied with the Petitioner No.1
– Husband. The directions imposed by the learned Family Court, which
are being challenged by the Petitioners are reproduced hereinunder for
ready reference :-
“ 1. As per the prayer in the present application, Husband
is ordered to be examined to ascertain the veracity of his
affidavit and assert his free consent through video
conferencing according to the terms and conditions as settled
hereinafter.
2. As the Husband is stated to be living out of country,
therefore, the parties shall disclose within 2 weeks of this
order, the Remote Point where the Husband wants himself to
be examined through Video Conference. The said Remote
Point shall be as per Rule 9(4)(1) of the Audio-Video
Conferencing Rules, 2025.
Page 2 of 7
Uploaded by ARUN B(HC02368) on Fri Oct 23 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 23 10:42:00 IST 2026
C/SCA/13677/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 19/10/2026
(GJHC240649802026)
3. The petitioners shall also disclose the name of the
‘Coordinator' appointed at the Remote Point by the concerned
Embassy as per Rule 9 of the Audio-Video Conferencing
Rules, 2025.
4. The petitioner shall also obtain the time slot for
proposed video conference from the Coordinator of Remote
Point and shall inform the same to this Court for further
proceedings of Video Conference.
5. After compliance of terms as mentioned in above para
No.2 to 4 regarding Remote Point, Coordinator at Remote
Point and obtaining time slot from Remote Coordinator, the
petitioners shall have to deposit Rs.8,000/- (Rupees Eight
Thousand Only) towards the expenditure and remuneration
of the Court Commissioner as well as the Coordinator. Out of
the said Rs.8,000/-, the Court Commissioner be paid
Rs.6,000/- and the Coordinator at the Court Point be paid
Rs.2,000/- as their respective remuneration.
6. All the expenditure/fees/remuneration to the
Coordinator of the Remote Point shall be paid by the
petitioner, who is to be examined through video conference,
directly to the Coordinator of the Remote Point and a receipt
of the same shall be submitted to this Court.
7. Once the petitioners disclose the nearest Remote Point,
particulars of Coordinator, obtain time slot from Remote Point
Coordinator and deposit money as directed above.
8. The date and time of video conferencing shall be fixed
during the working hours of this Court as per Rule 13(1) of
the Audio-Video Conferencing Rules, 2025.
9. Once the petitioners disclose the Remote Point,
particulars of Coordinator of the Remote Point and the date
as well as time for video conference is fixed, thereafter, Ms.
Bansariben Vaghela is hereby appointed as Court
Commissioner, who shall make inquiry about the truthfulness
of affidavit filed by the Husband and shall also make inquiry
about the consent given by him. It is made clear that the
Page 3 of 7
Uploaded by ARUN B(HC02368) on Fri Oct 23 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 23 10:42:00 IST 2026
C/SCA/13677/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 19/10/2026
(GJHC240649802026)
Court Commissioner shall follow Rule 13 and 19 of the Audio-
Video Conferencing Rules, 2025 while examining the
Husband through video conference.
10. The identity of the Husband shall be verified as per
Rule 6 of the Audio-Video Conferencing Rules, 2025 prior to
examining him through video conference. The Husband shall
communicate electronically the proof of his identity as
recognized under the law, to the Coordinator of the Court
Point, at the time of his examination through video
conference.
11. For the purpose of video conferencing to examine
Husband, only the secured video conference platform with
end-to-end encryption to protect data and privacy as
approved by Hon'ble High Court/Government, shall be used.
12. The affidavit of the Husband filed before this court in
his examination-in-chief shall be transmitted to the Remote
Point Coordinator through electronic communication to show
the same to the Husband so as to assess it's authenticity and
truthfulness as per Rule number 14 of Audio-Video
Conferencing Rules, 2025.
13. The affidavit of the Husband filed before this court in
his examination-in-chief shall be transmitted to the Remote
Point Coordinator through electronic communication to show
the same to the Husband so as to assess it's authenticity and
truthfulness as per Rule number 14 of Audio-Video
Conferencing Rules, 2025.”
4. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the afore directions, the
instant Petition has been preferred challenging order dated 25.03.2026
passed by the learned Family Court.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners submitted
that the conditions imposed vide the impugned order cannot be
complied with, as such, submitted that the impugned order is liable to
Page 4 of 7
Uploaded by ARUN B(HC02368) on Fri Oct 23 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 23 10:42:00 IST 2026
C/SCA/13677/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 19/10/2026
(GJHC240649802026)
be quashed and set aside. He submitted that the petitioner be
permitted to record his deposition through video conferencing after
imposing suitable conditions/directions which can be complied by him.
In support of his contentions, learned counsel for the Petitioners has
placed reliance upon the judgment rendered by the Coordinate Bench
of this High Court in Special Civil Application No.5760 of 2026 reported
in 2026:GUJHC:28651. Having placed reliance upon the ratio of the
aforesaid judgment, learned counsel for the Petitioners submitted that
the captioned petition deserves to be allowed.
6. Having considered the submissions advanced by the learned
counsel for the Petitioners and having gone through the records, it
appears that the Petitioners had instituted H.M.P. No.2520 of 2025
under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking dissolution
of marriage by way of mutual consent. It also emerges from the records
that petitioner No.1 is residing out of India, i.e, in Canada, therefore, he
sought permission to depose before the learned Family Court through
video conferencing and accordingly preferred an application below
Exh.14. The learned Family Court, having considered the said
application, allowed the same vide order dated 25.03.2026, however,
imposed certain onerous conditions, which cannot be complied by the
Petitioner.
7. Before proceeding further, it shall be apposite to refer to the
judgment rendered by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in Special
Civil Application No.5760 of 2026, wherein under identical
circumstances, the Coordinate Bench considered the ratio of the
judgments rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Santhina V. Vijaya
Venketesh [(2018) 1 SCC 1] and the judgment rendered by the
Coordinate Bench in Palakben Ravi Luni D/O Dhamasibhai
Page 5 of 7
Uploaded by ARUN B(HC02368) on Fri Oct 23 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 23 10:42:00 IST 2026
C/SCA/13677/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 19/10/2026
(GJHC240649802026)
Gobarbhai Rabari & Anr. v. None [Neutral Citation
No.2026:GUJHC:17292], and observed in para Nos.15,16 & 17 as
under:-
“ 15. Let me say that technology should serve as
handmaiden to justice, and not a hurdle in the path. It must
remain simple, reliable and accessible to litigant. If technology
or its adoption becomes complex, it risks delaying justice
rather than delivering it. Court, therefore, must adopt
technology with litigant friendly approach, with focus on
fairness, efficiency and human sensitivity. In essence,
technology should advance the cause of justice and not chaos.
Technology should ensure that timely justice becomes a reality
with care.
16. In the background of aforesaid reasons, without
hesitation, this Court holds that the learned Family Court, by
passing the orders below Exhibits-15 and 16, instead of
helping the litigant in advancing their cause in getting justice,
instead created hurdles in the path. Thus, the impugned
orders deserve to be set aside.
17.In the aforesaid circumstances and reason, the petition
succeeds. The impugned orders passed below Exhibits- 15
and 16 in HMP No.1472 of 2025 are hereby quashed and set
aside.”
8. Thus, in light of the ratio laid down by the Coordinate Bench in
Special Civil Application No.5760 of 2026, I am of the considered view
that the instant petition deserves to be allowed. Hence, the Petitioner
No.1 is permitted to appear and depose through video conferencing
from his own portable device; from his own place during the working
hours of the learned Family Court. The learned Family Court shall
accordingly fix the date and time by allotting the slot for video
Page 6 of 7
Uploaded by ARUN B(HC02368) on Fri Oct 23 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 23 10:42:00 IST 2026
C/SCA/13677/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 19/10/2026
(GJHC240649802026)
conferencing and shall forward the link of the platform authorized by
High court and used by Family Court to the email Id of Petitioner and
shall also inform the same through the learned advocate for the
Petitioner for onward transmission. In case of any confusion regarding
the identity of the Petitioner, the Petitioner shall forward his Govt. of
India approved Identity Card through electronic mode. The Petitioner
shall make sure that he remains visible and audible throughout the
entire video conferencing session and shall mention his full name, while
joining the session.
9. Thus, in view of the aforesaid directions, the captioned Special
Civil Application stands allowed to the aforesaid extent and is
accordingly disposed of.
10. Direct service is permitted.
(MOOL CHAND TYAGI, J)
ARUN….
Page 7 of 7
Uploaded by ARUN B(HC02368) on Fri Oct 23 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 23 10:42:00 IST 2026