- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010657472025 NC: 2026:KHC:46613-DB WA No. 1660 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA WRIT APPEAL NO. 1660 OF 2025 (GM-FC) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. RATHI KARTHEEK AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS W/O SRI SANJEEV RAVINDRAN 20400 VIA PAVISO, A24 CALIFORNIA 95014 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA …APPELLANT (BY SRI G.S. VENKAT SUBBARAO, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI SANJEEV RAVINDRAN AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS S/O SRI RAVINDRAN NO.PLH 15183 PRESTIGE LAKESIDE HABIT SH 35, DEVASTHANAGALU GUNJUR VILLAGE BENGALURU - 560 087 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI ANITHA R., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by K P SWETHA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010657472025 NC: 2026:KHC:46613-DB WA No. 1660 of 2025 THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN W.P. NO.474/2025 (GM-FC) FROM THE FILE OF LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU AND SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 17/07/2025 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, IN W.P. NO.474/2025, BY ALLOWING THE ABOVE APPEAL & ETC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE and HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE) 1. The appellant has filed the present appeal impugning an order dated 17.07.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.474/2025 (GM-FC). 2. The appellant had preferred the said petition impugning an order dated 16.12.2024 passed by the VI Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru [Family Court], whereby the - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010657472025 NC: 2026:KHC:46613-DB WA No. 1660 of 2025 appellant's application for appointing the court commissioner to examine the appellant through video conferencing was rejected. 3. The learned Single Judge had noted that the children were aged 14 and 16 years and therefore, the contention that the appellant could not travel even for a short period of time on account of her minor children, was not accepted. 4. The present appeal involves a threshold question as to its maintainability. However, notwithstanding the same, the learned counsel for the parties state that the appellant's application for examination through video conference may be considered strictly in accordance with the "Rules for video conferencing of courts" [the Rules]. 5. In view of the above, we dispose of the present appeal reserving liberty to the appellant to file an appropriate application before the learned Family Court for recording of evidence through video conferencing strictly in accordance with the Rules. If such an application is made, the learned Family Court shall consider the same in accordance with law, uninfluenced by the earlier order - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010657472025 NC: 2026:KHC:46613-DB WA No. 1660 of 2025 rejecting such application and shall endeavor to conclude the proceedings as early as possible. 6. Pending interlocutory application stands disposed of. Sd/- (VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- (K.S. HEMALEKHA) JUDGE KPS, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13