RIMPLE GUPTA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned advocate Mr. Omkarnath Ramkishore Tiwari has filed a Vakalatnama on behalf of respondent no.2 along with the affidavit. Let the same be taken on record and his name be reflected as learned advocate appearing for the respondent no.2.

(2.) The applicants are wife, son and daughter of the respondent no.2 and they have come before this Court impugning the order dtd. 21/6/2022 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Bharuch stating that the proceedings be conducted in camera, the pen drive and the certificate Mark 19/1 and 19/2 has been produced under Sec. 65B of the Indian Evidence Act and she states that pen drive should not be given to the respondent no.2 outside the Court room. It is stated that the respondent no.2 was having illicit relations with different women prior to marriage and even the said illicit activities continued after marriage and the applicant no.1 found her husband in a compromising position with different women when she searched his mobile phone, she immediately copied the data in her pen drive from the memory card of the mobile phone. It is stated that the pen drive contains indecent video clips of the husband with different women and she has proved the certificate under Sec. 65B of the Indian Evidence Act in her chief examination. The applicant no.1 has raised an apprehension that if the respondent no.2 is given the pen drive, then there is a strong apprehension that the video clips would be publicized and the innocent women would be defamed in the society and there is also a possibility that the respondent no.2 would blackmail the said innocent women by giving a threat to make videos viral in the society and thus, have made a prayer that the proceedings be conducted only in camera.

(3.) Advocate Mr. Tiwari, relying upon the affidavit of the respondent no.2, stated that since 26/5/2020 during the period of lock down, the applicant no.1 has returned back to her parental house along with her children and thereafter, she refused to return back to her matrimonial home despite several efforts made by the respondent no.2 and his family members and after reaching her parental house, initially she lodged a complaint with Mahila Police Station, Bharuch and made various false, frivolous and baseless allegation against the respondent no.2, that the respondent no.2 is having illicit affairs with other ladies and she alleges that applicant no.1 has stolen three memory cards from the mobile phone of the respondent no.2 which allegedly contains various objectionable pictures and videos of the respondent no.2 with other women and on the basis of the same, FIR was registered against the respondent no.2 and his family members under Sec. 498A of the IPC. It is stated that the learned Trial Court Judge has given a well reasoned order in accordance with law and the same does not require any interference of this Court.