Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
PANKAJ JAIN
Rachna Srivastava – Appellant
Versus
Sanjay Srivastava – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
PANKAJ JAIN, J.
1. Present revision petition is directed against order dated 01.04.2024 passed by JMIC Gurgaon.
2. The disputes relates to admission of personal diary of the petitioner in evidence. The Trial Court has allowed the diary to be tendered in evidence. The present revision petition has been preferred relying upon ratio of law laid down by Supreme Court in the case of Vibhor Garg vs. Neha reported as 2025 INSC 829
3. Counsel for the petitioner submits that diary in question being a privileged communication, cannot be allowed to be admitted in evidence in view of the provisions of Section 122 of the Evidence Act, 1872 re-enacted as Section 128 of the Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023.
4. The argument raised by counsel for the petitioner is misconceived. The personal diary of the complainant is being sought to be admitted in evidence. Section 122 of the Evidence Act reads as under:-
“122. Communications during marriage.––No person who is or has been married, shall be compelled to disclose any communication made to him during marriage by any person to whom he is or has been married; nor shall he be permitted to disclose any such communication, unless the person wh
Personal diaries do not fall under privileged communication as defined by Section 122 of the Evidence Act, allowing their admissibility in court during legal proceedings.
Section 122 of Act is compulsion on one among spouse to divulge communication transpired to him by other spouse during subsistence of their marriage.
The Family Courts Act permits lenient admissibility of evidence, allowing for tape-recorded conversations without the other party's consent, while upholding privacy rights.
The right to privacy in matrimonial disputes is not absolute and must balance with the right to fair trial, allowing relevant evidence to be admitted even if obtained through means that raise questio....
The right to privacy in matrimonial cases is not absolute and must yield to the right to present relevant evidence for a fair trial.
Right to privacy – Section 122 of Evidence Act does not touch upon aspect of right to privacy as envisaged under Article 21 of Constitution – Section 122 of Evidence Act recognises right to a fair tr....
Tape recordings made without the knowledge of one party infringe their right to privacy and violate constitutional rights, rendering them inadmissible in evidence for deciding divorce petitions under....
The court emphasized that allegations of adultery must be substantiated with credible evidence, and unauthorized recording of intimate moments violates the right to privacy.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
