Spouse can't claim carte blanche to install recording device in bedroom: Delhi High Court

A spouse cannot claim carte blanche to install a recording device in bedroom and other private space to collect evidence in matrimonial disputes, as it would spell doom for family relationship and create havoc in their personal lives and in society, the Delhi High Court has said.

Justice Anup J Bhambhani said that it is not uncommon for spouses to continue living together, even in matrimonial strife, for years on-end. So the beneficent statutory provision allowing a spouse to collect evidence must not be taken as a licence to resort to illegal means.

The court, however, upheld a family court's order allowing a man to produce as evidence a CD containing conversation of his wife with another woman where she purportedly spoke in a derogatory and defamatory manner about him and his family. This, he claimed, constituted as cruelty enabling him to seek divorce.

The wife, for her part, claimed that a secretly recorded conversation was a breach of her fundamental right to privacy.

The court did not agree entirely to her contention.

"While a litigating party certainly has a right to privacy, that right must yield to the right of an opposing party to bring evidence it considers relevant to court, to prove its case. It is a critical part of the hallowed concept of fair trial," it said.

The court also said since no fundamental right under the Constitution is absolute, in the event of conflict between two -- the right to privacy and the right to fair trial, both of which arise under the expansive Article 21--- the right to privacy may have to yield to the right to fair trial.

The court cited Section 14 of the Family Courts Act, to point out that it permitted the presiding judge to receive evidence, whether collected legitimately or otherwise, if the same would assist in effectively deciding the dispute.

For the family court, the test of admissibility of evidence is only its relevancy. The family court is thereby, freed of all rigours and restrictions of the law of evidence, the court said.

"No purpose would therefore, be served by emasculating the salutary provisions of Section 14 of the Family Courts Act by citing breach of privacy," it said.

However, the court said, "If the right to adduce evidence, collected by surreptitious means in a marital or family relationship, is available without any qualification or consequences, it could potentially create havoc in people’s personal and family lives and thereby, in the society at large."