Sridhar Chetan v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION No.390 of 2020 ====================================================== Sridhar Chetan Son of Mr. P.K. Ray, resident of Priyadarshi Nagar, house no. 192/39, D.P.S. School Road, P.s.- Rupaspur, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Law Department, 2.
Mrs. Bhawani Roy, wife of Sridhar Chetan, resident of E-108, Sai Poorna Apartment, Harlur Road, P.s.- Harlur-560068, Bangaluru (Karnataka) ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Archana Sinha @ Archana Shahi For the Respondent/s :
Mr.Smt.Kumari Amrita (Gp3) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. B. PD. SINGH ORAL ORDER 11-09-2025 Re: I.A. No. 01 of 2024.
Heard I.A. No. 01 of 2024.
2. The instant interlocutory application has been filed for amendment in paragraph no.1 of the main petition.
3. For the reasons stated in the application, supported with the affidavit, I.A. No. 01 of 2024 stands allowed.
Re: Civil Miscellaneous No. 390 of 2020 Heard learned counsel for both the parties.
2. The present Civil Miscellaneous application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner - Husband assailing the orders dated 14.11.2019 and 05.07.2019 passed by
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.390 of 2020(16) dt.11-09-2025 2/3 learned Principal Judge Family Court, Patna. By order dated 14.11.2019 he has passed the order of recall of witness to give statement to certify the genuineness of the C.D. which was filed by the petitioner in the light of Section 14 of the Family Court Act. The contents of C.D. are the necessary evidence for the case of the petitioner. By order dated 05.07.2019, learned Court has neither accepted the C.D. nor rejected the same, which was filed on 25.05.2019 by the petitioner for making the same as an exhibit rather the learned Court has observed that the same will be considered at the time of hearing.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner only prays that the documents filed on 23.06.2018 and 30.08.2018 be entered in the order sheet and the same be marked as exhibits.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that it may be marked with objection.
5. Merely putting any exhibit mark on a document shall not be considered as legally proved or termed as genuine document. All these aspects can be well decided after appreciating the entire facts and evidence of
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.390 of 2020(16) dt.11-09-2025 3/3 the parties.
6. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts and submission made by learned counsel for the respondent, the instant civil miscellaneous application is allowed. Trial Court is directed to take/recieve the documents filed by petitioner on 23.06.2018 and 30.08.2018 in the case record and be entered in ordersheet as well as be marked as exhibits with objection. However, this Court is not giving any opinion on the relevancy or admissibility and mode of proving in accordance with law, of any such documents whatsoever may be. The Trial Court will be at liberty to decide the admissibility and relevancy of those documents and decide the case accordingly.
(S. B. Pd. Singh, J) Ankit Kumar/- U