The Delhi High Court emphasized the necessity of concrete evidence to substantiate claims of adultery, especially in the age of deepfakes. A woman had requested Rs 2 lakh per month as maintenance from her husband. However, the family court ruled that the man should pay her Rs 75,000 monthly.
New Delhi: In the age of deepfakes, the Delhi High Court emphasized that photographs presented by a spouse alleging adultery must be substantiated with evidence in the family court. This statement made while addressing a man’s claim that his estranged wife engaged in adultery.
The high court dismissed the husband’s appeal against a family court‘s directive requiring him to pay Rs. 75,000 as maintenance to his wife and minor daughter.
During the proceedings, the husband’s lawyer pointed to certain photographs of his wife.
Read Also: Delhi High Court Rules: No Legal Immunity for Bigamy Despite Adultery’s Decriminalization
In response, a bench comprising Justices Rajiv Shakdher and Amit Bansal remarked,
“It is not clear whether the respondent/wife is the individual in the photographs, as suggested by the appellant/husband’s counsel.”
They further noted,
“We must acknowledge that we are in the era of deepfakes, and thus, the appellant/husband would likely need to validate this evidence before the family court.”
Deepfake technology has the capability to generate realistic videos, audio recordings, and images that can manipulate and mislead viewers. This technology allows for superimposing the likeness of one person onto another, altering their words and actions, thereby presenting a false narrative or spreading misinformation.
When questioned by the court about whether the allegation of adultery made by the wife was mentioned in the husband’s response to the plea under the Hindu Marriage Act, the husband’s counsel acknowledged that this aspect not included in the reply.
The court observed that since the husband’s petition for divorce still pending adjudication, if this issue raised, the court may provide an opportunity for the parties to present their evidence in support of their respective cases.
The Delhi High Court observed,
“Notably, this aspect, which is vigorously emphasized before us, almost in a desperate attempt to avoid the obligations imposed by the challenged judgment, is not mentioned in the impugned judgment of the family court.”
The husband’s lawyer contended that this issue had been raised in the family court but overlooked in its decision.
The high court responded,
“If this was indeed the case, the appropriate course of action for the appellant/husband would have been to file an application for review with the family court. However, the husband has not pursued this measure.”
The man, an architect, contesting an April 15 family court order that mandated him to pay Rs. 75,000 in monthly maintenance to his estranged wife and their child.
Read Also: Delhi High Court Rejects Husband’s Bid for Blood Samples Amid Adultery Allegations
The couple, who married in 2018, has a five-year-old daughter.
The court informed that the wife held a postgraduate degree, but currently unemployed and residing with her parents following the separation.
The woman had initially requested a monthly maintenance of Rs 2 lakh from her husband. However, the family court ordered the husband to provide her with a monthly maintenance of Rs 75,000.