The Madhya Pradesh High Court, Gwalior Bench, permitted a husband to use his wife's WhatsApp chats, obtained without her consent, as evidence to support allegations of adultery. This decision came during a matrimonial dispute under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
The husband alleged his wife had an extramarital affair and submitted her WhatsApp messages, obtained via a special application installed on her phone. The wife challenged this action, stating it violated her right to privacy and amounted to illegal evidence collection. She argued that such chats were inadmissible under the Indian Evidence Act and violated provisions of the Information Technology Act.
Read Also:- MP High Court: Assaulting Wife for Resisting Unnatural Sex Qualifies as Cruelty Under IPC Section 498A
However, the Court rejected her objection and ruled that the Family Courts Act, specifically Section 14, permits broader admissibility of evidence in family disputes.
“The Family Court is thereby freed of restrictions of the strict law of evidence,” the Court stated.
Justice Ashish Shroti emphasized that Section 14 allows the court to admit evidence — even if collected unlawfully — provided it helps in effectively resolving the dispute. The Court clarified that the standard test is the relevance of the evidence, not how it was obtained.
Read Also:- MP High Court Upholds CEO’s Authority to Withdraw Sarpanch’s Financial Powers in Corruption Case
Quoting Article 21 of the Constitution, the Court noted:
“Since no fundamental right under our Constitution is absolute, the right to privacy may have to yield to the right to fair trial.”
Further, Section 122 of the Indian Evidence Act also permits disclosure of marital communication in suits between spouses, providing additional grounds for admissibility.
The judgment also analyzed key precedents, including Sharda v. Dharmapal and K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India, to establish that while privacy is a fundamental right, it is not absolute and can be subject to limitations in the interest of justice.
“If Section 14 is held not to apply in its full expanse to evidence that impinges on privacy, the very object of constituting Family Courts shall be frustrated,” the Court noted.
While the Court upheld the Family Court’s decision to admit the chats as evidence, it also laid down safeguards, emphasizing that such evidence should be treated with caution and verified for authenticity. Importantly, it clarified:
“Merely because a court allows evidence to be admitted does not mean the person who collected it illegally is absolved of civil or criminal liability.”
Ultimately, the Court dismissed the wife’s petition and confirmed that the evidence, due to its relevance, was validly admitted under Section 14 of the Family Courts Act.
