Privacy of communication must be respected; inquiries without consent are impermissible.

Devan Ramachandran, J.

The petitioners in both these cases assail orders of the learned Family Court, Malappuram, in IA No.4/2026 in OP No.49/2024 and IA No.5/2026 in OP No.1058/2024 because, it has rejected their request for summoning the ‘Call List’ of a particular number and documents with respect to it.

2. The learned Family Court has found that the ‘Call List’, which has been sought for, relates to a phone number belonging to the mother of the respondent – wife; and that an inquiry into the same, without her knowledge or permission, can never be allowed. The learned Court has also held that, there is no evidence, as of now, that the respondent has used the phone number exclusively during any period of time.

3. Sri.K.Mohanakannan – learned counsel for the petitioners, argued that the findings of the learned Family Court are cursory and without any supporting opinion; and that this is manifest from the non-speaking nature of the orders. He argued that there is evidence available to show that the respondent was using her mother’s phone; and hence that its ‘Call List’ is vitally important.

4. We are afraid that we cannot find favour with the afore submissions of Sri.Mohanakannan because, the details of a phone are a matter of privacy to its owner. It cannot be summoned or an inquiry conducted against it, without such person being in the party array, or without the person being involved.

5. In the case at hand, it is conceded that the respondent’s mother is not arrayed and that there is no relief sought against her. The mere allegation that the respondent had borrowed and used her mother’s phone, cannot be a ground for the petitioners to seek details of the same and cause an inquiry into it.

6. We consequently cannot find the learned Family Court to have erred in any manner.

These Original Petitions are, therefore, dismissed.

Sd/-