Chhattisgarh High Court says husbands cannot force wives to share mobile or bank passwords. Doing so violates privacy and can be considered domestic violence.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
BILASPUR: The Chhattisgarh High Court clearly said that a husband has no right to force his wife to give her mobile phone or bank account passwords.
If he does this, it is not only a violation of her privacy, but it can also be seen as domestic violence under the law.
ALSO READ: COVID-19 | ‘Accused of Housing Tablighi Jamaat Attendees During Pandemic’: Delhi High Court Exonerates 70 Indians
While giving the judgment, Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey said very clearly that even though marriage is a relationship where partners share their lives, it does not mean they lose their individual privacy.
The judge added-
“Marriage does not grant the husband automatic access to the wife’s private information, communications and personal belongings. The husband cannot compel the wife to share her passwords of the cellphone or bank account and such an act would amount to a violation of privacy and potentially domestic violence. There should be a balance between marital privacy and the need for transparency and at the same time trust in the relationship.”
The case came up when a husband filed for divorce under Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, saying that his wife was cruel to him. In reply, the wife denied all the allegations and gave her written response.
During the court hearing, the husband asked the police — specifically the Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) of Durg — to provide the call detail records (CDR) of his wife. He said he had doubts about her character.
He also submitted an application to the family court, asking for the same records. But the family court rejected his request. After that, he approached the High Court, asking them to overturn the family court’s order.
The High Court refused to accept his plea and supported the family court’s decision. The High Court said that just doubting someone’s character is not enough to take away their right to privacy.
The Court also referred to important judgments of the Supreme Court of India, like KS Puttaswamy, People’s Union for Civil Liberties, and Mr. X v Hospital Z, and reminded that privacy is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution.
The High Court said-
“As held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the right to privacy includes the preservation of personal intimacies, the sanctity of marriage and sexual orientation, therefore, the learned Family Court rightly rejected the application moved by the petitioner. The right to engage in mobile conversations in the privacy of one’s home or office without interference is certainly protected under the right to privacy. Such conversations are often intimate and confidential in nature and constitute an important facet of a person’s private life.”
So, with all these points, the High Court dismissed the husband’s request for his wife’s call records and said he cannot force her to share private information like passwords.
- In this case, Advocate Aman Tamrakar represented the husband (petitioner) in court.
CASE TITLE:
Chandrakant Mahilange vs Smt. Nageshwari Gahne
WP227 No. 612 of 2025.
Would You Like Assistance In Drafting A Legal Notice Or Complaint?
CLICK HERE
Click Here to Read Our Reports on Domestic Violence
Click Here to Read Our Reports on Privacy Violation
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
