Read Time: 05 minutes
It is the petitioner husband's case that in the era of gender equality and personal choice, it cannot be said that the presence of a man and woman in a public place, would indicate an adulterous relationship.
The Supreme Court is all set to consider an appeal filed by an aggrieved husband questioning whether calling of booking details for a hotel stay, call records etc. to prove charges of adultery violate the right to privacy.
Sachin Arora, the petitioner, has challenged the Delhi High Court's order whereby it had held that 'Right to Privacy' by a husband could not be claimed against the production of records sought by the wife to substantiate her case of divorce on grounds of cruelty and adultery.
A bench of Justices Krishna Murari and Sanjay Kumar on Tuesday this week allowed the respondent wife two weeks’ time to file counter affidavit. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, be filed within one week thereafter, the order further said.
The case will now be taken up on August 7, 2023.
The Delhi High Court in its impugned judgment dated May 10, 2023 reiterated that the 'Right to Privacy' under Article 21 is not an absolute right, and where there is a clash between two fundamental rights, courts would advance the one serving public interest and morality.
"...when a wife seeks the help of the court for procuring evidence that would go a long way to prove adultery on the part of her husband, the court must step in," opined the single judge bench of Justice Rekha Palli.
Summoning of tickets, payments, stay and travel would be relevant to show the proximity of relationship between the petitioner and his female friend, and hence be instrumental in determining the charges of adultery, the high court had further noted.
Before the Supreme Court, the husband has submitted that the High Court has given expansive powers of evidence collection to the family court and its reasoning is based on an incorrect reading of the supreme court’s judgment decriminalising adultery.
"If Family Courts themselves start bearing the burden to establish grounds of divorce and thereby start summoning the personal documents of individuals it would cause great level of injury to an individual‘s fundamental right of privacy," the appeal states.
Notably, the family court had allowed an application preferred by the respondent wife seeking preservation of CCTV footage of Hotel Fairmont, Jaipur, for the period between 29.04.2022 and 01.05.2022. This order was challenged by the petitioner husband before the High Court.
Case Title: Sachin Arora vs. Manju Arora
Please Login or Register
