Last Updated:
The Supreme Court on Monday overturned a Punjab and Haryana High Court order that termed recording a wife’s phone calls without her consent a violation of privacy.
Supreme Court of India (File photo/PTI)
The Supreme Court on Monday set aside a Punjab and Haryana High Court’s judgment, holding that recording a wife’s telephonic conversation without her knowledge or consent amounts to a “clear breach” of her fundamental right of privacy.
The High Court had also observed that such recordings cannot be admitted in evidence before a family court.
A bench of Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma thus held that a secretly recorded telephonic conversation of the spouse is admissible as evidence in matrimonial proceedings.
“Some arguments have been made that permitting such evidence would jeopardise domestic harmony and matrimonial relationships as it would encourage snooping on the spouses, therefore, infringing the objective of section 122 of the Evidence Act.”
“We don’t think such an argument is tenable. If the marriage has reached a stage where spouses are actively snooping on each other, that is in itself a symptom of a broken relationship and denotes a lack of trust between them,” the bench observed while pronouncing the judgment.
The remarks by the top court came after a Special Leave Petition (SLP) challenged the Punjab and Haryana High Court’s decision.
THE HIGH COURT RULING ON SECRETLY RECORDING SPOUSE’s CONVERSATION
According to Live Law, the case involved divorce proceedings of a couple, wherein the family court in Bathinda had allowed the husband to rely on a compact disc containing recorded phone conversations with his wife to prove allegations of cruelty.
Challenging this, the wife approached the Punjab and Haryana High Court, contending that the recording was made without her consent and its acceptance would breach her fundamental right to privacy.
The High Court accepted her plea and set aside the family court’s order, and noted that permitting such recordings in evidence would be unjustified, as the conversations were recorded surreptitiously by one party.
It held that the circumstances in which the responses were elicited could not be ascertained and that the court would be ill-equipped to assess such context, even with cross-examination.
The husband challenged the High Court’s judgment before the Supreme Court, wherein his advocate argued that the right to privacy is not absolute and must be balanced with other rights and values.
Referring to the exception in Section 122 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, it was contended that communication between married persons can be disclosed in matrimonial proceedings seeking divorce.
The petitioner also referred to Sections 14 and 20 of the Family Courts Act, 1984, asserting that these provisions were enacted to ensure a fair trial and aid in the discovery of truth in matrimonial disputes.
ALSO READ | Cases With Deliberately Misleading Arbitration Clauses Must Be Thrown Out Of Court: SC
Vani Mehrotra is the Deputy News Editor at News18.com. She has nearly 10 years of experience in both national and international news and has previously worked on multiple desks.
Vani Mehrotra is the Deputy News Editor at News18.com. She has nearly 10 years of experience in both national and international news and has previously worked on multiple desks.
view comments
- First Published:
Source link
[ad_3]
