The petitioner had filed a petition in the supreme court earlier to transfer the case filed by her husband in Gautam Budh Nagar’s Family court to Saket family court. In 2016 the SC had dismissed the petition stating the reason that the petitioner will not face any serious problems in traveling between the two places. The court had dismissed the petition on the condition that the trial court in Gautam Budh Nagar will conduct the trial through video conference.
But the said condition imposed by the Apex court was not followed by the lower court as there was no facility for a video conference in the district. Also, from the authority drawn from the case Santini V. Vijaya Venkatesh it was held that the matrimonial cases shall not be held through video conference. Taking the said case into account Family court refused to hold the trial through video conference.
Aggrieved by the above order the petitioner approached the SC, where the bench headed by Chief Justice of India, SA Bobde, Justice L Nageshwara Rao, and Justice Vineet saran held that the trial shall be conducted through a video conference. The court considered the situation of the covid-19 pandemic and held that the court should hear the matter through a video. The court clearly stated that the said the case is an exception to the authority held in the Santini V. Vijaya Venkatesh case. The court granted permission that the trial should be held through video conference even though it is a matrimonial case. The court while dismissing the review petition instructed the family court of UP to continue the case through an online means. The court also took into consideration the ongoing pandemic situation while pronouncing the judgment. But the court made clear that the said case cannot be set aside.