(1.) This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, Vishal Kaushik, challenging order dated 26.07.2013, whereby seven applications filed by him, respectively on 15.06.2013(Annesure-3), 21.06.2013(Annexure-4 and 5); 28.06.2013(Annexure-7); 19.07.2013(Annexure-8, 9 and 10), were dismissed by Family Court, Ajmer(for short 'the Family Court').
(2.) When evidence of the petitioner was concluded, the matter came up before the Family Court on 15.06.2013 for recording statement of the respondent-wife and her witnesses. She produced herself as NAW-1 on that day. The petitioner moved two applications on that very day. First application was filed for placing on record original cassette with a DVD, which was marked as Exhibit-1 and camcorder(Camera), on which recording was made, charger of camcorder and the bag in which camcorder, charger and cassette were kept. Second application was moved with the prayer that the original cassette(Exhibit-1) and DVD be sent for FSL examination to determine their genuineness. Family Court dismissed the first application without seeking reply from the respondent. With regard to second application, the Family Court directed the petitioner to furnish copy of the same to the counsel of the respondent, who was asked to file reply thereto. Respondent filed reply to such application on 21.06.2013 in which she stated that the DVD did not contain her voice. The petitioner then moved yet another application with the prayer that the respondent's voice sample may be recorded by some independent forensic organisation and the same should be matched with the voice in all the video and audio DVDs submitted by the petitioner as Exhibit-1, 4 and 5. Later on, the petitioner submitted one more DVD to be part of voice match exercise on 05.07.2013, which was titled as "Kapil Intro", reiterating his request for obtaining voice sample of the respondent to ascertain whether such DVDs contain her voice or not. Petitioner moved another application on 21.06.2013 to implead Kapil Rana, with whom the respondent-wife allegedly had extra marital relations, as party respondent. According to the petitioner, the Presiding Officer of the Family Court on receiving various applications of the petitioner observed that all those application would be decided on conclusion of evidence.
(3.) Cross examination of the respondent-wife resumed on 28.06.2013 on which date she again reiterated that she has not seen the video in Exhibit-1 DVD. The petitioner then again moved an application that he should be allowed to play DVD Exhibit-1 in the Court so that the respondent may watch DVD, recognize the contents of the same and acknowledge the conversation made therein, which would enable him to put proper question to her regarding contents of the same. The Presiding Officer of the Family Court did not allow him to do so and opportunity was granted to counsel of the respondent to file reply to the application. The petitioner on 19.07.2013 moved one more application with the prayer that Exhibit-1, DVD be allowed to be played in the Court in presence of the respondent-wife and the petitioner be allowed to cross examine her in the light of the contents of the said DVD, Exhibit-1. It was thereafter that on 19.07.2013, the petitioner filed yet another application in the above series for keeping the DVDs in sealed packets, as he apprehended that some interpolation may be done in the contents of DVDs. He thereafter filed one more application on 19.07.2013 that on page No. 3 in line No. 15, the cross-examination of the respondent conducted on 21.06.213 has not been correctly recorded. The Family Court dismissed all the applications vide order dated 26.07.2013. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing present writ petition.