Gopan (Officer) 27 November 2013

Appeal against in-camera trial only for petitioner

I'm the respondent in a divorce case filed under HMA 13(1) on ground of impotency and mental cruelty arising out of non-consummation of marriage which lasted only one month.
I've undergone potency test by state medical board on my application for the same in court,and the report is in my favour.

The petitioner, wife, filed application under HMA-22 & FC Act 11 for in-camera trial for petitioner, respondent and all witnesses including the doctors in the medical board.

I opposed the same saying in-camera should only be allowed for petitioner, and not for other witnesses especially the doctors in medical board.

The FC passed the order allowing in-camera trial for the petitioner only. The order says the above petition was filed u/s 11 of FC Act and nothing mentioned about HMA-22.

Now, the petitioner approached the High Court against the FC order on contention that FC ignored the given below points:

1) Sec 11 of FC act clearly states that 'In every suit or proceedings to which this act applies the proceedings may be held in camera if the family court desires AND SHALL BE HELD SO IF EITHER OF THE PARTY SO DESIRES.

The court failed to understand the meaning of the word SHALL used in the above section.

2) Sec 22 of HMA 1955 also mandates a procedure to conduct in camera.It also imposes an obligation to the courts conduct trial in camera. The word used in both sections 11 & 22 is "Proceedings" which means entire proceeding in a suit from start to end.
Sec 22 of HMA also casts a mandatory duty on courts to strictly hold the proceedings before it in camera.

So, allowing the in camera only for the petitioner is illegal and should be set aside.

Now, please help me to clear the following points:

a) In such a case involving personal privacy issues like impotency, should FC court allow in camera for entire proceedings even if the respondent wants open court trial for himself and witnesses but not against in camera for petitioner only?

b) Why should the evidence of doctors from medical board which only says about the potency of husband be conducted in camera? Even the husband wants open court.

c) It would be helpful if anybody provide any judgements from HC/SC regarding in-camera proceedings which totally deny or allow for only one party or selected proceedings in one suit?

Please advise.

Reply Follow

1 Replies

Rama chary Rachakonda (Secunderabad/Telangana state Highcourt practice watsapp no.9989324294 ) 27 November 2013

Hearing of cases - the 'in camera' rule

Family law cases are heard in private (in camera) to protect the privacy of the family. Only officers of the court, the parties to the case and their legal representatives, witnesses and such other people as the judge allows will be in the courtroom while the case is being heard.

Nothing discussed in court, including the outcome of the case can be published. If anything is published or broadcast the person responsible is guilty of an offence. An exception to this is contained in the Civil Liability and Courts Act, 2004.