In a landmark ruling with far-reaching implications for Indian family law, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has allowed a husband to submit WhatsApp messages of his wife, obtained without her consent, to substantiate charges of adultery and cruelty in a divorce case. While affirming the sanctity of privacy under Article 21 of the Constitution, the Court emphasized that the right to privacy is not absolute and must yield to the right to a fair trial in matrimonial disputes.
A Digital Dilemma: Adultery, Privacy, and the Right to Fair Trial Collide in Court
The courtroom drama unfolded over a marriage solemnized in 2016 and strained by allegations of infidelity. The husband alleged his wife was engaged in an extramarital affair, substantiated by private WhatsApp chats obtained through a spyware app installed on her phone. He sought divorce on the grounds of cruelty and adultery under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
The wife countered with a strong defence, invoking her fundamental right to privacy under Article 21 of the Constitution and citing violations under Sections 43, 66, and 72 of the Information Technology Act, which criminalise unauthorised access to personal data. In its June 16, 2025, order, the High Court, however, ruled that in matrimonial disputes, Section 14 of the Family Courts Act, 1984, allows courts to accept any evidence, even if inadmissible under the Indian Evidence Act, so long as it aids in resolving the dispute.
The Court drew upon the precedents set by the Supreme Court in Sharda v. Dharmpal and Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India, clarifying that no fundamental right, including privacy, is absolute. “Where a clash occurs between the right to privacy and the right to a fair trial, the latter must prevail,” the Court stated.
FCRF x CERT-In Roll Out National Cyber Crisis Management Course to Prepare India’s Digital Defenders
Section 14: The ‘Wide Gate’ to Relevance Over Procedure
Section 14 of the Family Courts Act, 1984, emerged as the major point of the verdict. This provision permits family courts to receive any evidence that may help in the effective adjudication of disputes, even if such material would be excluded under strict evidentiary rules. In its detailed judgment, the High Court held:
- The admissibility of the WhatsApp chats hinges not on how they were obtained but on their relevance to the dispute.
- The family court has the discretion to decide whether such evidence should influence the final decision, depending on its authenticity and probative value.
- The Court emphasized that acceptance of evidence does not exonerate the person who collected it illegally. Civil or criminal liability may still follow.
Legal experts underscore that this ruling expands evidentiary thresholds for family courts, allowing more direct forms of digital evidence in sensitive disputes.
Algoritha: The Most Trusted Name in BFSI Investigations and DFIR Services
Experts Weigh In: Balancing Justice, Privacy, and Technology
Legal professionals and privacy advocates have responded with a mix of approval and caution. Ruchita Datta, Partner at D&T Juris, notes that if the WhatsApp messages are authenticated and verified through appropriate digital certification, under Section 63 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA) 2023, they could offer compelling evidence in establishing adultery, which is otherwise often proven only through circumstantial evidence.
Others, like Kirti Vyas of ASL Partners, highlight the judgment’s nuanced position: while the right to privacy is violated, the evidence is not discarded outright, thus not allowing procedural breaches to suppress potentially crucial material.
Importantly, the judgment calls for procedural safeguards: in-camera proceedings, judicial discretion, and careful scrutiny to prevent misuse. The High Court also took the rare step of rejecting earlier conflicting judgments as per incuriam (rendered in ignorance of relevant law), thereby solidifying the present ruling as a precedent in matrimonial jurisprudence.
About the author – Prakriti Jha is a student at National Forensic Sciences University, Gandhinagar, currently pursuing B.Sc. LL.B (Hons.) with a keen interest in the intersection of law and data science. She is passionate about exploring how legal frameworks adapt to the evolving challenges of technology and justice.