IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL DHAGAT &

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE B. P. SHARMA

th

ON THE 28 OF OCTOBER, 2025 FIRST APPEAL No. 101 of 2017 SMT. EKTA NIGAM Versus SHEKHAR NIGAM AND OTHERS Appearance:

Smt. P. L. Shrivastava - Advocate for the appellant.

Shri Kaustubh Shankaer Jha - Advocate for the respondent No.1.

ORDER Per: Justice B. P. Sharma This First Appeal under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act arises out of a common judgment and decree of divorce passed by the Family Court, Jabalpur on 06.01.2017 in Civil Suit No. 273A/2013 (suit originally instituted at Bangalore and later on transferred to Jabalpur), whereby trial court decreed the suit filed by the respondent No.1/husband, Shekhar Nigam (hereinafter “the respondent”) for dissolution of marriage under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 on the grounds of cruelty and adultery and dismissed C.S. No.156A/2013 filed by the appellant/wife for restitution of conjugal rights.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the marriage between the appellant/wife and the respondent/husband was solemnized on 20.11.2009 according to Hindu rites and ritual at Jabalpur and after marriage appellant went to reside at her husband’s house, and out of the wedlock a son, Arnav, was born on 24.11.2010. The parties started residing separately from 08.04.2012, and thereafter the respondent filed a civil suit for divorce on 13.06.2012 at Bengaluru on the ground of cruelty and adultery with respondent No.2 under Sections 13(1)(ia) and 13(1)(i) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, which was subsequently transferred to Jabalpur and registered as Civil Suit No. 273A/2013. During the pendency of the civil suit for divorce, the appellant initiated multiple proceedings including an FIR under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, an application under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights, and proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

3. By judgment and decree dated 06.01.2017 passed in Civil Suit No. 273A/2013, the Family Court dissolved the marriage between the parties on the grounds of cruelty and adultery under Section 13(1)(ia) and 13(1)(i) of the Hindu Marriage Act, awarded maintenance of Rs. 5,000/- per month for the minor son and granted a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- as stridhan to the appellant–wife. Being aggrieved by the same, appellant has preferred the present first appeal challenging the findings on adultery and cruelty, as well as the quantum of stridhan.

4. The appellant submits that the Family Court has erred in law and on facts in holding that the charge of adultery stands proved on the basis of electronic evidence derived from keylogger software installed by the respondent on the computer system. It is urged that the chats and emails relied upon were “forwarded messages” capable of being edited, that the respondent admittedly installed keylogger software in January 2012 and had full control over the device and passwords, and therefore the integrity, authenticity and reliability of the alleged electronic record/evidence stand fundamentally compromised, rendering the requirements of Section 65-B of the Evidence Act unsatisfied. The appellant further contends that the Family Court has misread her evidence and that of her father, has incorrectly inferred admissions which were never made, and has drawn adverse inferences on the basis of photographs and chats which, even if taken at face value, do not depict or establish sexual relations of appellant with respondent No.2/Dabar Ansari.

5. It is also contended that the trial court has improperly relied on material and evidence led in other proceedings, which, according to the appellant, is impermissible in the present matrimonial suit without due proof in accordance with law. The appellant asserts that her allegations regarding dowry r