SARITA Vs. BHEEM SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant misc. appeal has been preferred by the appellant Smt. Sarita being aggrieved of the order dtd. 15/7/2021 passed by the Judge, Family Court, Hanumangarh in Misc. Civil Case No.162/2017 whereby, the learned Family Court, rejected the application filed by the appellant for summoning one Sahab Ram as a witness on her behalf and also closed her evidence. The appellant has also challenged the order dtd. 31/7/2021 whereby, the application for reopening the evidence has been rejected.

(2.) We have heard and considered the submissions advanced at bar and have gone through the impugned orders.

(3.) Learned counsel Shri Harishit Bhurani representing the appellant urged that the appellant does not insist that the witness Sahab Ram should be summoned by the Family Court to give evidence in her support. But as per him, the direction to close the evidence of the appellant is contrary to the COVID SOPs prevailing at the relevant point of time because the High Court had prohibited all the subordinate courts of the State of Rajasthan from recording evidence by restrictions which were lifted from 31/7/2021. Thus, the closure of the evidence of the appellant by the learned Family Court, even though a prohibition for examining the witnesses was prevailing, is contrary to the prevailing guidelines issued by the High Court. On these grounds, Shri Bhurani implored the Court to accept the appeal, set aside the impugned orders and reopen the evidence of the appellant.