Chhattisgarh High Court: In a case wherein, the petitioner-wife had challenged the order dated 21-10-2021, whereby the application filed by the respondent-husband under Section 311 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (‘CrPC’) was allowed, Rakesh Mohan Pandey, J., opined that the husband had recorded wife’s conversation without her knowledge and behind her back, which amounted to violation of her right to privacy and the right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. The Court opined that the Family Court, Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh (‘Family Court’) had committed an error of law in allowing an application and thus, set aside the order passed by the Family Court on 21-10-2021.
Background
In the instant case, the wife filed an application under Section 125 of the CrPC for the grant of maintenance, and the same was pending before the Family Court since 2019. The wife had submitted her evidence, thereafter the case was fixed for witnesses examination and production of documents.
Meanwhile, the husband filed an application under Section 311 of the CrPC along with the certificate issued under Section 65-B of the Evidence Act, 1872 (‘IEA’) for the petitioner’s re-examination on the ground that certain conversation was recorded on the mobile phone and he wanted to cross-examine the wife, confronting her with the said conversation. The Family Court vide order dated 21-10-2021, allowed the said application.
Thus, the wife filed the petition before the present Court to challenge the order dated 21-10-2021.
The wife contended that the conversation was recorded by the husband without her knowledge and the same could not be used against her, thus the Family Court had committed an error of law by allowing the application as it infringed her right to privacy.
Analysis, Law, and Decision
The Court relied on People’s Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India (1997) 1 SCC 301; ‘X’ v. Hospital ‘Z’ (1998) 8 SCC 296 and Anurima v. Sunil Mehta 2015 SCC OnLine MP 7340 and opined that in the present case, it appeared that the husband had recorded the wife’s conversation without her knowledge and behind her back, which amounted to violation of her right to privacy and also the right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.
The Court further opined that the right to privacy was an essential component of right to life envisaged by Article 21 of the Constitution, therefore the Family Court had committed an error of law in allowing an application under Section 311 of the CrPC along with the certificate issued under Section 65-B of the IEA, and set aside the order passed by the Family Court on 21-10-2021.
[Aasha Lata Soni v. Durgesh Soni, 2023 SCC OnLine Chh 3959, Order dated 05-10-2023]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For the petitioner: Vaibhav A. Goverdhan, Advocate;
For the respondent: T.K. Jha, Advocate
Buy Constitution of India HERE
Buy Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 HERE
