The absence of a Section 65B certificate does not invalidate electronic evidence in family law proceedings; personal marital disputes are exempt from conventional evidentiary restrictions.

ORDER :

N.S.Sanjay Gowda, J

1. The wife is in the appeal challenging the order by which the husband’s petition for grant of divorce has been allowed and the marriage conducted between them on 24.5.2003 has been dissolved.

2. It is not in dispute that the marriage between the couple was solemnized on 24.5.2003 and out of this wedlock, they have a daughter, named Nandini, who was born on 17.10.2004 and is presently aged about 21 years.

3. The husband approached the Family Court seeking for divorce on the ground that he had been treated with cruelty and therefore, he was entitled for a decree of divorce. It was his case that he was engaged in the business of running a bakery with the help of several workers for whom a room had been provided in his house. He stated that his wife used to come to the shop and would stay at home as per the needs of the bakery and she was thus in touch with the workers. He contended that his wife was having an adulterous relationship with a worker of the bakery and despite warnings of the husband to desist from such adulterous activities, she continued the same and the husband was also constrained to inform his in-laws who demanded proof.

4. The husband contended that after noticing the behaviour of his wife and her insistence of continuing her adulterous life, he directed the workers to vacate his house and start living in a rented house, but yet there was no change in the conduct of his wife. He stated that he, therefore, set up CCTV camera in the house and in this equipment, he captured visual proof of his wife living in adulterous life with a worker of the bakery on 28.9.2014. He stated that he thereafter called his wife’s relatives and furnished them the proof of his wife’s adulterous life and his wife’s relatives pleaded that their reputation may be saved and that they would take the wife along with them. He stated that accordingly, the wife and he separated as per the decision of the relatives and after 3 years of separation, the wife demanded maintenance be given to her and only thereafter, she would give consent for divorce. He stated that he accordingly, started paying Rs.7,500/- per month from May 2015 and despite the fact that she was receiving maintenance, she would go on to give various representations to the Corporation Bank and other authorities to cancel the licence of the bakery business being run by her husband. As a consequence of these complaints, the husband stated that he was forced to close the business and had to start a new business in his own name. Notwithstanding the wife was harassing the husband despite receiving maintenance.

5. The husband stated that in January 2018, the wife along with her brother and the relatives came to the rented house and behaved in an inappropriate manner and she also declared that she would reside with him, as a result of this quarrel, the owner of the house had asked the husband to vacate the house and the husband was also forced to vacate the house. He also stated that he was threatened with dire consequences and that he would be killed, for which he had also informed the police. The husband, therefore, contended that having regard to the manner in which he was treated with cruelty, it was obvious that he could not live with the wife and also by the r