7x3u4VpIsC5CZOE7RsHbt8wQ_PnYWL4/view?usp=drivesdk of the google drive given in the application under Order XXXIX Rule 2A of CPC it is found that no electronic record had been stored on the cloud on the said date. Even at the time of hearing on the present application on 10.10.2025 the said google drive link were not functional. However, in the present application, in paragraph No. 12, and also in the affidavit accompanying the same, it has been stated and deposed that the videos captured by investigator on 24.3.2023 and 11.4.2023 were downloaded in the pen drive on 20.8.2025 by using the computer. At some other place in the same paragraphs contrary stand has been taken to the effect that the videos were downloaded on 13.4.2023. In the considered view of the court when at the time of passing of order dated 24.7.2025 nothing was found stored in the google cloud on the URL mentioned by the applicants in their application, it was highly improbable for the applicants to download such videos in the pen drive on 20.8.2025. Further, as already indicated, the original video recordings are in possession of the plaintiffs, but neither the same have been sought to be filed nor the person concerned who captured the same has been examined as a witness during the plaintiffs' evidence. In these circumstances, it cannot be believed that the videos in question were download in the pen drive by the AR of the applicants as asserted in the application.
