"If The Marriage...": Top Court Allows Spouse's Recorded Calls As Evidence
The secretly recorded telephonic conversation of a spouse is admissible evidence in a matrimonial dispute case, the Supreme Court ruled today. The top court set aside a Punjab and Haryana High Court ruling that secretly recording a spouse's telephone conversation amounted to a breach of privacy and cannot be admitted as evidence in a family court.
Dictating the order, Justice BV Nagarathna said some arguments have contended that allowing such conversations as evidence would jeopardise domestic harmony and matrimonial relationships and encourage snooping on spouses. "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," Justice Nagarathna said while pronouncing the judgment. The bench also comprised Justice Satish Chandra Sharma.
What Is The Case
The matter, which first came up in a Bhatinda family court, involves divorce proceedings under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The husband accused his wife of cruelty and cited recorded phone conversations to prove his allegation. The family court allowed a CD with these recordings as evidence. The wife challenged this in the High Court, arguing that the calls were recorded without her consent and accepting them as evidence would breach her fundamental right to privacy.
The high court agreed and set aside the family court's order. The bench said the responses over the call and the circumstances in which they were made could not be ascertained. The high court reiterated that spouses talk openly without considering that their words could be scrutinised in a courtroom. The husband challenged this ruling in the top court, which has now ruled in his favour.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
103 women, girls go missing in Maha daily, nearly 90% traced
1 2 Nagpur: Ninety per cent of 103 women and girls going missing every day between April 2024 and March 2025 (37,695 in all) in Maharashtra were traced, chief minister Devendra Fadnavis informed the state legislative council on Wednesday. In Nagpur city alone, 5,897 people — including 4,923 women and girls — were reported missing between January 2024 and May 2025. Of these, 5,210 persons were located, pushing Nagpur's recovery rate in missing person cases to over 90%, and in some instances as high as 97%. Fadnavis said dedicated operations like 'Operation Muskaan' and 'Operation Shodh' significantly improved the recovery rate across the state, with Nagpur emerging as one of the top-performing regions. "Targeted campaigns like Operation Muskaan and Operation Shodh have delivered visible results. Nagpur's success rate under these initiatives is among the highest," Fadnavis said while replying to a question by various legislators. State-wide, Operation Muskaan — focused on tracing missing children — helped recover 4,193 minors, while Operation Shodh, focused on women, helped locate 4,960 missing women and 1,364 children within a month-long drive. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Cardiologists Recommend: Eat 1 Teaspoon Tonight – Wake Up With a Flatter Stomach Hollywood News | USA Click Here Undo Police also found 106 women and 703 children who had never been formally reported missing but were located during field operations. Fadnavis said that following Supreme Court guidelines, an FIR must be filed mandatorily in all missing person cases. "If a child is missing, it is immediately registered as a kidnapping case. This has improved police accountability and response time," he said. To institutionalise efforts, the state has established Missing Cells at every police station, headed by a woman officer. IPS officers at the rank of additional director general (ADG) now directly monitor missing cases and women's safety. The CM acknowledged that human trafficking remains a concern and said the govt is working to break such networks. Fadnavis also highlighted the role of Bharosa one-stop centres, which provide shelter, legal help, and counselling to women who leave home due to domestic or family issues. Schools are being targeted through the 'Police Kaka-Didi' initiative to educate children about safety, including procedures related to missing cases.
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
Lawyers skipping hearings is professional misconduct, says Allahabad high court
1 2 3 Prayagraj: Advocates not appearing for listed cases amount to professional misconduct, said the Allahabad high court while hearing a bail application where no one was present on behalf of the applicant to argue the matter. When the case list was revised by the court and no lawyer appeared for the applicant in a bail matter, Justice Krishan Pahal said, "Advocates are not appearing in majority of listed cases that too on multiple dates. Non-appearance of the counsel for the applicant amounts to professional misconduct. It also tantamount to bench-hunting or forum-shopping," the court further added. When the bail application was called out at the outset, the court noted that such non-appearance was not a first or isolated incident as it had occurred on previous dates as well. However, the counsel for the informant informed the court that the statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) had already been recorded and the trial was at its conclusive end. Taking a serious note of non-appearance of the counsel for the applicant, the court referred to the Supreme Court's decision in Ishwarlal Mali Rathod vs Gopal (2021) in which it was held that courts shall not grant adjournments in a routine or mechanical manner and must not become a party to delays in the delivery of justice. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Luxurious Apartments With a Smart 20:40:40 Payment Plan L&T The Gateway Book Now Undo While noting that the mere pendency of a bail application cannot confer any right upon the applicant and that it cannot be allowed to remain pending indefinitely, the court said, "The applicant cannot be permitted to dilute the stream of justice by repeatedly remaining absent from judicial proceedings without any reasonable explanation. Absence of any reason for non-appearance is blatant abuse of process of law, even though the order is available on the website of the high court." "The resources of the court which include precious judicial time are scarce and already stretched beyond elastic limits. Valuable court time, which is required to be engaged in adjudication of serious judicial action, is wasted on frivolous and vexatious litigation, which is misconceived and is an abuse of the process of law. A judicial system has less than sufficient resources to afford justice without unreasonable delay to those having genuine grievances. Therefore, the courts have held that totally unjustified use of judicial time must be curbed and the party so wasting precious judicial resources must be required to compensate not only the adversary but also the judicial system itself," the court added. In this conspectus, the court in its decision found that the applicant Pooja has lost interest in pursuing the matter. Therefore, by the efflux of time, it seems to have been rendered infructuous. Hence, the court rejected the bail application. "The instant case is the misuse of the process of court by the applicant," the court added in its order dated July 8.
United News of India
2 hours ago
- United News of India
SC asks SIT to focus only on Mahmudabad's ‘Op Sindoor' posts; bars further summons
New Delhi, July 16 (UNI) The Supreme Court today questioned the Haryana Police Special Investigation Team (SIT) for allegedly misdirecting itself in the probe against Ashoka University Professor Ali Khan Mahmudabad over his two social media posts on 'Operation Sindoor'. A bench of justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi observed that the SIT was formed specifically to investigate the contents of the two posts and asked why it was expanding the scope of inquiry. The observation came after senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Mahmudabad, submitted that the SIT had seized his devices and was asking about his foreign trips over the last ten years, despite the court's May 28 order limiting the probe to the posts. 'We just want to know from SIT for what purpose they have seized devices. We will call them (officers),' Justice Kant said, adding, 'we are asking why SIT is, on the face of it, misdirecting itself. They were supposed to examine contents of the posts.' ASG SV Raju, appearing for Haryana, submitted that the manner of investigation was the prerogative of the investigating officer and all incriminating aspects had to be examined. Sibal countered that there could not be a 'roving inquiry' and added that Mahmudabad had already been summoned four times. Taking note of the SIT's interim report acknowledging the seizure of devices and their forensic examination, the court recorded that Mahmudabad had cooperated with the investigation and surrendered his devices. Directing that he should not be summoned again, Justice Kant remarked, 'You don't require him, you require a dictionary.' The bench dictated its order stating, 'Though it may not be expedient or desirable for us to comment on the manner in which SIT has proceeded, we deem it necessary to remind it of the mandate contained in our order dated May 28 and consequently direct the SIT to conclude its investigation with reference to the contents of the two social media posts as early as possible but not later than four weeks.' The court also clarified that Mahmudabad, while restrained from commenting on sub judice issues, was free to write or express opinions on other topics. On May 21, the court had granted interim bail to Mahmudabad and directed the Haryana DGP to constitute an SIT comprising senior IPS officers not belonging to Haryana or Delhi to examine his two posts. It had clarified that the SIT probe would remain confined to these two FIRs and could not be expanded. During the hearing today, the court also asked the Haryana government about its response to the National Human Rights Commission taking cognizance of the registration of FIRs in the case. 'You tell us about that also,' Justice Kant told the Haryana AAG. Mahmudabad was arrested on May 18 over his posts on 'Operation Sindoor' and remained in custody until May 21. He faces charges under Section 196, 152, and other provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita relating to acts prejudicial to communal harmony, making assertions likely to cause disharmony, acts endangering national sovereignty, and words or gestures intended to insult a woman's modesty. UNI SNG PRS
