As per case facts, respondent No.2 initiated a CBI inquiry into alleged castrations at Dera Sacha Sauda, leading to charges against the petitioner and others. The petitioner appealed the Special ... Judicial Magistrate's order allowing respondent No.2's cross-examination via video conferencing from the USA, arguing it impaired the accused's rights and demeanour assessment. The question arose whether video conferencing for witness cross-examination, especially from abroad, aligns with fair trial principles and legal requirements for witness presence. Finally, the High Court, referencing Supreme Court precedents and its own Video Conferencing Rules, affirmed that virtual presence meets legal requirements, allows demeanour observation, and is appropriate given the witness's location and associated travel difficulties. It found no perversity in the impugned order and dismissed the petition, viewing it as a delaying tactic.