Recording wife's phone call without her knowledge is infringement of privacy: HC

Recording of wifes telephonic conversation without her knowledge is infringement of her privacy the Punjab and Haryana High Court has observedThe court of Justice Lisa Gill passed the order last month on a plea filed by a woman who challenged a 2020 order of the Bathinda family courtThe Bathinda family court had allowed the womans estranged husband to prove a CD pertaining to recorded conversations between him and his wife subject to the condition of its correctnessRecording of telephonic conversation of the wife without her knowledge is a clear cut infringement of her privacy observed the high courtFurthermore it cannot be said or ascertained as to the circumstances in which the conversations were held or the manner in which response elicited by a person who was recording the conversations because it is evident that these conversations would necessarily have been recorded surreptitiously by one of the parties it further observedThe husband had submitted a petition in 2017 seeking a divorce from the woman Their marriage was solemnised in 2009 and the couple had a daughter togetherAlso read Inserting penis in minors mouth lsquoless seriousrsquo crime Allahabad High CourtDuring crossexamination an application was moved by the husband in July 2019 seeking permission to submit his supplementary affidavit by way of examinationinchief along with the CD and transcripts of conversations recorded in memory card or chip of the mobile phoneIn 2020 the family court allowed the husband to prove the CD subject to the condition of correctness and also observed that strict principles of evidence were not applicable to the proceedings before it keeping in view Section 14 and 20 of the Family Court Act Thereafter the wife approached the high courtThe counsel for the wife argued that the evidence sought to be led by the husband is completely beyond pleadings therefore absolutely impermissible It was contended that the pleadings do not refer to any such conversations which are sought to be provedTherefore this evidence has been wrongly accepted Furthermore the said CDs are a clearcut infringement and downright invasion of the wifes privacy thus a violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India as the conversations have been recorded without knowledge what to say of consent of the petitioner the counsel arguedThe counsel further contended that the family court has given a complete go bye to Section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act because if recordings were done through a mobile phone CDs of the recording and transcripts thereof in any case cannot be accepted as evidenceThe counsel for the petitioner submitted that the husband being very well aware of the conversations allegedly held years prior to filing of the divorce petition was at liberty to have incorporated them in his pleadings at the very first instanceThough the veracity of such conversations cannot be vouched for even if taken to be correct they are not admissible in evidence as they have been recorded without the consent or knowledge of the petitioner the counsel submittedThe counsel for the husband refuted the arguments and submitted that there was no question of infringement of the right of privacy and in any case the husband can always be subjected to crossexaminationIt is vehemently argued that conversations so recorded are not beyond pleadings as it has always been the husbands case that he was treated with cruelty by his wifeThough specific conversations are not mentioned in the petition it has been clearly mentioned that the wife used to treat him in a cruel manner his counsel arguedThe recorded conversations are only an attempt to prove the same therefore it cannot be said that they are beyond pleadings the counsel arguedThe high court set aside the Bathinda family court orderThis story has been sourced from a third party syndicated feed agencies Midday accepts no responsibility or liability for its dependability trustworthiness reliability and data of the text Midday managementmiddaycom reserves the sole right to alter delete or remove without notice the content in its absolute discretion for any reason whatsoever