VIDEO-CONFERENCING: In The State of Maharashtra v. Dr. Praful B. Desai [AIR 2003 SC 2053], the question involved was whether a witness can be examined by means of a video conference. The Supreme Court observed that video conferencing is an advancement of science and technology which permits seeing, hearing and talking with someone who is not physically present with the same facility and ease as if they were physically present. The legal requirement for the presence of the witness does not mean actual physical presence. The court allowed the examination of a witness through video conferencing and concluded that there is no reason why the examination of a witness by video conferencing should not be an essential part of electronic evidence. In Amitabh Bagchi Vs. Ena Bagchi (AIR 2005 Cal 11), the court held that the physical presence of person in Court may not be required for purpose of adducing evidence and the same can be done through medium like video conferencing. In Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation Vs. NRI Film Production Associates (P) Ltd. (AIR 2003 KANT 148), certain conditions have been laid down for video recording of evidence. They are as follows: 1) The person who examines the witness on the screen shall file an affidavit/undertaking before examining the witness with a copy to the other side with regard to identification. 2) The witness has to be examined during working hours of Indian Courts. Oath is to be administered through the media. 3) The witness should not plead any inconvenience on account of time different between India and USA. 4) Before examination of the witness, a set of plaint, written statement and other documents must be sent to the witness so that the witness has acquaintance with the documents and an acknowledgment is to be filed before the Court in this regard. 5) Learned Judge is to record such remarks as is material regarding the demeanour of the witness while on the screen. 6) Learned Judge must note the objections if raised during recording of witness and to decide the same at the time of arguments. 7) After recording the evidence, the same is to be sent to the witness and his signature is to be obtained in the presence of a Notary Public and thereafter it forms part of the record of the suit proceedings. 8) The visual is to be recorded and the record would be at both ends. The witness also is to be alone at the time of visual conference and notary is to certificate to this effect. 9) The learned Judge may also impose such other conditions as are necessary in a given set of facts. 10) The expenses and the arrangements are to be borne by the applicant who wants this facility. In Suvarana Musale vs Rahul Musale [2015 (2) Mh.L.J. 801], it was held that recording of evidence with help of electronic method and techniques is acknowledged and recognized in judicial system. In that case, the Petitioner-wife was working in U.S. and has a minor daughter aged 6 yrs, traveling to India for being present physically was expensive and she may face difficulty in getting leave and hurdles in obtaining VISA. An application for recording evidence through video conferencing was therefore allowed.