Archive · 4 Nov 2025
Karnataka HC Allows Woman to Testify Remotely from US Home
Imagine a lady living far away in America needed to tell a judge in India about something important that happened.
There was a rule that said she had to talk to the judge from an Indian embassy or consulate.
But the embassy's working hours didn't match the court's working hours, so it was very difficult for her.
She asked the judge if she could just talk from her own home instead.
The judge agreed because she was the one telling the story, not someone accused of a crime.
The judge also made sure she promised not to hang up during the call.
So, she was allowed to talk to the judge from her home in America to help with the case.
Karnataka High Court has allowed a woman to testify remotely from her US residence.
The court relaxed a rule mandating testimony from an Indian embassy or consulate for overseas witnesses.
The woman is a complainant in a case involving cruelty and unnatural sex against her husband.
The relaxation was granted due to practical difficulties with coinciding working hours of Indian embassies and courts in the US.
The court accepted the woman's undertaking not to disconnect during deposition.
- Who
- Karnataka High Court and a woman filing a case against her husband
- What
- Relaxation of a rule requiring remote testimony from an Indian embassy/consulate to allow a complainant to depose from her residence in the US.
- When
- Order passed on September 22, made publicly available recently.
- Where
- Karnataka High Court, India, and the woman's residence in the United States.
- Why
- To address the practical difficulty of coinciding working hours between US-based Indian embassies/consulates and Indian courts, and to allow the complainant to provide testimony in a case of cruelty and unnatural sex.
Complainant's Argument
Husband's Argument
Deposition Location
Complainant's Argument
The complainant should be allowed to depose from her US residence due to practical difficulties with embassy working hours.
Husband's Argument
The complainant should have approached the trial court, and remote testimony risks disconnection during crucial cross-examination, prejudicing his case.
Rule Enforcement
Complainant's Argument
The rule mandating testimony from an embassy should not be strictly enforced as she is the complainant, not an accused.
Husband's Argument
There is an apprehension of disconnection during cross-examination, especially with crucial questions.
Technical Feasibility
Complainant's Argument
Half the examination was already conducted smoothly virtually, and she is willing to provide an undertaking not to disconnect.
Husband's Argument
Cross-examination could be prejudiced by potential disconnections.
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- Judge
- Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum
- Order Date
- September 22
- Rule Relaxed
- Video Conferencing Rules 5.3.1 (remote testimony from embassy/consulate)
- Deponent Location
- Woman's residence in the United States