Digital Love, Legal Dilemma
- IJLLR Journal
- Nov 11
- 2 min read
Aastha Kumari, ICFAI University, Dehradun
Introduction
What happens when marital abuse becomes an excuse for surveillance and the court becomes the platform that validates it? Imagine your private chats, shared images, or late-night text being secretly downloaded without your consent and presented as an evidence, not by a hacker but by your own husband. Indian courts have begun to accept such evidence, arguing that a spouse’s right to fair trial can override the other’s Right to Privacy. This sets a dangerous precedent, especially in a country where one in three married women report domestic abuse, this judicial stance is blurring the line between justice and stalking. This article challenges that narrative, arguing that constitutional privacy can’t be so easily surrendered at the altar of convenience.
Case Brief: The Madhya Pradesh Ruling
In a 2025 judgement, the Madhya Pradesh High Court allowed the use secretly obtained WhatsApp chats of the wife by the husband as an evidence where he accused his wife of adultery. The wife argued that the chats were obtained without her consent and it is violated her Rights to privacy under article 21 of the constitution. However, the court said that the right is not absolute and can be limited to ensure a fair trial. Further stating that the evidence in matrimonial dispute should not be excluded even if it gathered without consent according to the Family Courts Act. The court cited that in Puttaswamy judgement but gave more weight to husband’s claim than to wife’s right to privacy. The court, by overlooking how the evidence was obtained, raises concerns about weakening privacy protection in matrimonial cases.
Legal Framework: Can WhatsApp Chats Be Admitted?
According to Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (mirrors in Section 61 of the Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023), electronic record like chats and emails are admissible only if accompanied by a certificate authenticating the data source and method of extraction.
In Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer (2014) and Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kailash Gorantyal (2020), the supreme court said that electronic evidence without this certificate (in accordance with Sec.
65B Indian Evidence act) is inadmissible.
Still, the family courts often overlook procedural rigidity when it comes to digital proof of infidelity. This flexibility, while practical, comes close to crossing the line between practical decision making and staying true to the constitution. Courts must ask: is the method of gathering evidence necessary, legal, and the least harmful to the person’s dignity?
