A man reportedly used a mobile app to secretly record his wife’s private conversations for years. He submitted these recordings as evidence in a divorce case, which drew criticism. The Supreme Court raised questions about the legality and fairness of using such recordings. The case highlights concerns about privacy and misuse of technology in legal matters.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India expressed strong disapproval towards a man who recorded private conversations with his wife over several years and submitted these recordings as evidence in a divorce case.
The husband allegedly used a mobile app to capture these conversations, raising significant legal and ethical concerns.
During the proceedings, Justice Nagarathna questioned,
“What kind of husband records conversations for so many years?”
Also Read: Allahabad High Court: “Wife Not Observing ‘Parda’ Doesn’t Entitle Husband To Divorce”
This case highlights the tension between the right to privacy enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution and the provisions of the Indian Evidence Act. The court is set to evaluate the relevance of Section 122 of the Indian Evidence Act, which generally protects communications between spouses, preventing one from disclosing such conversations unless it pertains to a legal dispute between them.
Senior Advocate Vrinda Grover emphasized that this provision, created during a pre-digital age, requires reinterpretation to align with contemporary technological realities.
Justice Nagarathna noted the necessity of finding a balance between privacy rights and legal exceptions, stating,
“We cannot make a section unworkable by interpretation. The provision creates an exception when the suit is between married spouses.”
The court will also look into how this affects others, like children, and the bigger issue of consent. Earlier, a High Court said the recordings could not be used as evidence because they were made without consent.
However, Justice Nagarathna observed that many High Court rulings have primarily concentrated on privacy issues, neglecting the statutory exceptions provided in Section 122.
An amicus curiae has been appointed to compile relevant issues and present a detailed report to the Supreme Court.
The matter is scheduled for further discussion on February 18.
Article 21 of the Indian Constitution is a fundamental right that guarantees the protection of life and personal liberty.
It states, “No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.” This provision ensures that every individual, regardless of their citizenship status, is entitled to protection of their life and liberty while within Indian territory.
The right to life and liberty under Article 21 can only be curtailed through a legal procedure that is fair, just, and reasonable. Arbitrary actions by the state are prohibited, ensuring that no one is deprived of these fundamental rights without following the law. Over the years, the judiciary has expanded the scope of this article, interpreting “life” and “liberty” in a broader sense.
Article 21 is enforceable in courts, and violations can be challenged under Articles 32 (Supreme Court) and 226 (High Courts) of the Constitution. However, the rights under this article are not absolute. They may be restricted if the deprivation is in accordance with a valid law that adheres to the principles of natural justice.