Surat: A court here granted a mutual-consent divorce to a couple living overseas after recording their testimony through video conferencing, relying on a recent Gujarat High Court ruling that encourages litigant-friendly use of technology in judicial proceedings.This case involved a 35-year-old man from Mahidharpura and a 32-year-old woman from Utran, who are currently in Sierra Leone and Canada respectively.The couple married in Surat in Nov 2015 according to Hindu rites. Disputes and misunderstandings affected their marriage, and they concluded they could not live under the same roof. After living separately from March 2023, they moved abroad for career opportunities.Last year, both filed a petition for divorce by mutual consent under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act before the Surat family court. Ashwin Jogadiya represented the woman, while Devang Kansara appeared for the man.With both parties living overseas, the woman appointed her father as her power of attorney holder and the man appointed his mother.When the matter reached the stage of recording evidence, the question arose of whether both parties needed to be physically present, appear from Indian embassies or be virtually present through video conferencing. Referring to the recent Gujarat High Court judgment, the advocates asked the court to permit virtual appearance through video conferencing.The advocates told the court that requiring the couple to appear physically would be difficult because of geographical distance, time-zone differences and other practical constraints. Accepting the request, the court allowed the couple to record their testimony through video conferencing.Jogadiya told TOI: “In April 2026, Gujarat High Court delivered an important ruling on recording the testimony of a husband living in Australia through video conferencing. The court observed that ‘court must adopt technology with litigant friendly approach, with focus on fairness, efficiency and human sensitivity. In essence, technology should advance the cause of justice and not chaos. Technology should ensure that timely justice becomes a reality.’ We requested the same and our request was granted.”The court subsequently granted the divorce. The order noted that the couple had no children from the marriage and had mutually agreed not to initiate any future litigation against each other on any matter arising from their marital relationship.
