- Electronic communications can be used as evidence in matrimonial disputes, says Chhattisgarh High Court
- The court ruled the right to privacy is not absolute and must be balanced with the right to a fair trial
- The High Court emphasized truth-seeking over technicalities and dismissed a woman's petition
Private electronic communications including WhatsApp chats and call recordings can be used as evidence in matrimonial disputes, the Chhattisgarh High Court has said.
The order came while hearing a complex marital dispute case by a high court bench of Justice Sachin Singh Rajput. On the question of admissibility of electronic evidence in marital disputes, Justice Rajput said the right to privacy is not absolute; it must be balanced with the right to a fair trial.
The high court's order is significant as it reflects the changing nature of family litigation in the digital age. Also, a judicial interpretation of the balance between the right to privacy and the right to justice has emerged.
What Was The Dispute
A Raipur resident filed a divorce petition against his wife in a family court. The husband said her WhatsApp chats and call recordings with other individuals were crucial to proving his allegations. He sought permission from the court to take the material on record.
The woman, however, strongly objected to the petition alleging her husband hacked her mobile phone and took the material, which violated her right to privacy. The family court accepted the husband's petition, an order which his wife challenged in the high court.
"The right to privacy guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution is important, but not absolute. The right to a fair trial is also a fundamental element of the justice system. If relevant evidence is withheld solely on the grounds of privacy, the court will not be able to reach the truth," Justice Rajput said.
The high court cited Section 14 of the Family Courts Act, 1984, which says a family court can take on record any document or material that may be helpful in the effective resolution of a dispute, even if it is not technically admissible under the normal evidence rules.
That is, the court's goal in family matters is to rise above technical hurdles and reach the truth.
The high court clarified that while the woman has the right to privacy, her husband has the right to a fair trial and to prove his claim. The high court said it has a duty to strike a balance between the two - if digital evidence is directly relevant to the dispute, it cannot be rejected solely on the basis of how it was obtained.
The high court then dismissed the woman's petition.
