NEW DELHI, Jul 4: The Supreme Court has upheld a Delhi High Court ruling that permitted a wife to seek court assistance in obtaining electronic and documentary evidence, including call detail records (CDRs) and hotel booking information, to support her allegations of adultery against her husband in a matrimonial dispute.
A bench comprising Justices Manmohan and K Vinod Chandran dismissed the appeal filed by the estranged husband, challenging the high court’s May 10, 2023 order. The apex court said it found no reason to interfere with the decision of the Delhi High Court and accordingly rejected the plea.
“Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this court is of the view that no interference is called for with the impugned judgment,” the bench observed while pronouncing its order.
The case stems from proceedings where the wife alleged that her husband was involved in an extramarital relationship and sought divorce on grounds of adultery. She had requested access to relevant records, including hotel stay details and communication data, to substantiate her claims.
The Delhi High Court, in its earlier ruling, had held that courts could assist in the collection of such evidence when necessary for matrimonial disputes, particularly in cases involving allegations of adultery. It had also observed that the right to privacy, though constitutionally protected, is not absolute and may be subject to reasonable restrictions in public interest and judicial proceedings.
The high court had further relied on provisions of the Family Courts Act, 1984, particularly Section 14, which allows family courts to admit a wide range of evidence, including material that may not be strictly admissible under the Indian Evidence Act, if it assists in resolving disputes.
According to the high court’s reasoning, direct proof of adultery is rarely available, and circumstantial evidence such as hotel booking records, identity details, payment information, and call data can play a crucial role in establishing facts in matrimonial litigation.
It had also noted that the husband’s request to block disclosure of such information could not be sustained when weighed against the wife’s legal right to prove her allegations. The court observed that the documents sought were relevant to determine whether the husband had stayed with another woman and whether communication patterns supported the allegation of an extramarital relationship.
The high court had further clarified that the Family Courts Act empowers courts to receive information that may assist in adjudicating disputes, even if such material might otherwise be considered inadmissible under general evidence law. It emphasised that family courts are expected to adopt a flexible approach in sensitive matrimonial matters.
In its reasoning, the high court had also addressed the issue of privacy, stating that while the right to privacy is a fundamental right, it is not absolute. It observed that in cases involving allegations of adultery during an existing marriage, privacy claims cannot override the need for fair adjudication of matrimonial disputes under the Hindu Marriage Act.
The Supreme Court’s dismissal of the appeal effectively affirms this legal position, reinforcing the view that courts may direct the production of relevant records when required for establishing claims in divorce proceedings.
The wife had originally approached the family court seeking preservation and production of records related to hotel reservations, payment details and identity documents linked to a specific room booking during a disputed period. She had also sought call detail records to establish communication patterns between her husband and the alleged third party.
The family court had allowed the request, directing preservation of documents in sealed cover, noting that such evidence could be crucial in determining the truth of the allegations raised in the divorce petition.
With the Supreme Court’s latest ruling, the Delhi High Court’s interpretation stands upheld, strengthening the legal position that evidentiary needs in matrimonial disputes can, in appropriate cases, outweigh privacy objections when backed by statutory provisions and judicial discretion.
The judgment is expected to have wider implications for divorce proceedings involving allegations of infidelity, particularly in cases where parties seek digital or third-party records to substantiate claims.