The right to privacy in matrimonial cases is not absolute and must yield to the right to present relevant evidence for a fair trial.

CAV Order

For convenience, the parties in this Writ Petition shall be referred to as the petitioner/wife and the respondent/husband.

2. Challenge in this petition is to the order dated 12.12.2024 passed by the First Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Raipur, District Raipur, CG (hereinafter referred to as ‘Family Court’) in Case No. 718/2023 by which the application filed by respondent/husband herein under Order VII Rule 14 CPC has been allowed.

3. Facts of the case in short: The respondent/husband filed an application seeking a decree of divorce against the petitioner/wife under Section 13(1)(ia)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act of 1955”). During the pendency of the said divorce application, the respondent/husband filed another application under Order VII Rule 14 CPC for taking the mobile recording of the conversation and Whatsapp chat made between the petitioner/wife, her relatives and other persons on record. Application under Order VII Rule 14 CPC was duly replied to by the petitioner/wife raising an objection that the respondent/husband was a man of suspicious mindset and that the call recording and the Whatsapp chat sought to be brought on record by him were obtained through illegal means by hacking her mobile, and therefore, prayed for rejection of that application. Learned Family Court however allowed the application of the respondent/husband by the order dated 12.12.2024 holding that the documents sought to be brought on record may be helpful in deciding the application for divorce. It is this order which is under challenge in this petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner/wife submits that the order dated 12.12.2024 (Annexure P-1) which is under challenge in this petition is illegal and without any basis as the documents sought to be brought on record by the respondent/husband were obtained by playing fraud and without the consent of the petitioner/wife. He submits that the respondent/husband by obtainment of such documents has invaded upon the privacy of the petitioner/wife and thus transgressed her fundamental right of life and personal liberty as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. He submits that the Family Court has fallen in serious error of law in not considering the fact that the documents obtained and sought to be produced in the pending divorce case by the respondent/husband are not admissible in evidence. In support of his submissions, counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the decision of this Court in the mater of Aasha Lata Soni v. Durgesh Soni rendered on 05.10.2023 in CRMP No. 2112 of 2022.

5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/husband supports the order impugned to be just and proper and submits that after the application filed by the respondent/husband under Order VII Rule 14 CPC being allowed, the documents sought to be brought on record have been exhibited without there being any protest or objection from the side of petitioner/wife as to the admissibility of the same, and therefore it cannot be said at this stage the Family Court has committed an error of law and jurisdiction in passing the order impugned. He submits that merely allowing the application filed by the respondent/husband under Order VII Rule 14 CPC cannot be said to cause any prejudice to the interest of the petitioner/wife, and therefore, the petition is liable to be dismissed in limine. Learned counsel for the respondent/husband further submits that the order impugned has just allowed the respondent/husband to bring certain electronic documents on record having passed the