The Supreme Court said on Monday that a record call can be used as evidence in marital disputes without wife’s knowledge. The court rejected the Punjab-Haryana High Court’s decision, stating that doing so is a violation of the wife’s right to privacy and cannot be considered as evidence.
The court said that the right to secrecy in married life cannot be fulfilled. Under Section 122 of Indian Evidence, a conversation between husband and wife cannot be exposed in court, but consider it an exception in cases like divorce.
A bench of Justice Biwi Nagratna and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma said, ‘We do not believe that there has been a violation of the right to privacy in this case. Section 122 recognizes the confidentiality of dialogue between husband and wife, but is not associated with the constitutional right of privacy (Article 21).
What was the matter?
The case started from a family court in Bathinda, where the husband had applied for divorce on the basis of recording of a conversation with his wife. The court accepted the call recording as evidence. The wife challenged the decision in the Punjab-Haryana High Court. The High Court called it a violation of privacy and said that this recording cannot be considered evidence.
The High Court, citing the Andhra Pradesh High Court and other decisions, said that it is wrong to secretly record the personal conversation of husband and wife.
Husband’s argument- Always not a witness in the case of husband and wife
The husband’s lawyer said that the right to privacy is limited and should be balanced with other constitutional rights. There are many cases in marital disputes many times, which decrease only between husband and wife and have no witnesses. In such a situation, evidence collected with the help of technology becomes necessary.
Delhi Court had said- Thinking of considering wife to husband’s property unconstitutional
On April 18, the Delhi High Court acquitted the accused person in the case of adultery filed by the husband of a woman. The court said- The thinking of considering the wife as the property of the husband is now unconstitutional. This mentality has been going on since the Mahabharata period.
Justice Nina Bansal Krishna, in his judgment, cited the Supreme Court’s historic decision in which Section 497 of the IPC was declared unconstitutional. This law was based on patriarchal thinking, in which the wife was considered a woman, not a criminal, who was seduced.
The High Court said- Draupadi was put at stake in gambling by her husband Yudhishthira in Mahabharata. Draupadi had no voice, there was no value of her dignity. This thinking remains in the society even today, but the Supreme Court has declared it unconstitutional.
