Chhattisgarh High Court Landmark Ruling on Electronic Evidence in Matrimonial Disputes
In a groundbreaking judgment, the Chhattisgarh High Court has established that WhatsApp chats and call recordings can be considered admissible evidence in matrimonial disputes. The court emphasized that even material obtained through potentially illegal means may be accepted if it is relevant and genuine to the case at hand.
Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Family Court Order
The High Court, on February 11, dismissed a petition filed by a woman who was contesting a Raipur family court decision. That lower court had permitted her husband to submit mobile recordings and WhatsApp conversations as evidence in their ongoing divorce proceedings under the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955.
Justice Sachin Singh Rajput, presiding over the case, delivered the ruling. He asserted that the right to privacy is not absolute and must be balanced against the right to a fair trial in sensitive matrimonial matters.
Background of the Divorce Case
The husband had initiated divorce proceedings, and during the trial at the Raipur family court, he sought to introduce electronic evidence. This included WhatsApp messages and conversations involving his wife and her relatives.
The wife strongly objected, alleging that her husband had hacked her phone to obtain this data illegally. She argued this violated her fundamental right to privacy under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.
Despite her objections, the family court allowed the husband's application on December 12, 2024. This decision prompted the wife to appeal to the High Court, leading to this significant ruling.
Legal Analysis: Privacy vs. Fair Trial
The High Court meticulously examined the conflict between the right to privacy and the provisions of the Family Courts Act of 1984. Justice Rajput highlighted that Section 14 of this Act grants family courts broad authority.
This section allows family courts to receive any evidence or document that aids in effective dispute resolution, even if such evidence would normally be inadmissible under the strict rules of the Indian Evidence Act.
The court observed that while privacy is a fundamental right, it is subject to reasonable restrictions. In legal battles, especially those involving matrimonial disputes, parties must have a fair opportunity to present all relevant evidence.
Justice Rajput noted that excluding crucial evidence at the threshold could severely undermine the cause of justice. Therefore, the primary test for admissibility in these cases is the relevance and genuineness of the information presented.
Special Provisions of Family Courts Act
The court clarified that Section 14 of the Family Courts Act is a special legislative provision. It is specifically designed to relax strict evidentiary principles to better handle sensitive personal disputes, such as marriage dissolution.
This approach ensures that family courts can focus on substantive justice rather than getting bogged down by technical procedural hurdles.
Supreme Court Precedents Cited
To support its reasoning, the High Court referenced recent Supreme Court judgments, including the notable case of Vibhor Garg v. Neha from 2025. These precedents underline that spousal communications do not enjoy absolute privilege when they are essential for proper adjudication in suits between married couples.
Court's Final Decision and Implications
After thorough consideration, the High Court found no illegality in the family court's original decision. Consequently, it affirmed the order and dismissed the wife's petition.
However, the court made it clear that the husband still bears the burden of proving the authenticity of these electronic documents during the full trial. This ruling sets an important precedent for the use of digital evidence in matrimonial cases across India.
Key Takeaways:
- WhatsApp chats and call recordings can be valid evidence in divorce cases.
- Privacy rights are not absolute and may yield to fair trial requirements.
- Family courts have special powers to admit evidence under the Family Courts Act.
- The authenticity of electronic evidence must still be proven during trial.
