Digital Privacy vs Fair Trial: High Court's Game-Changing Verdict on WhatsApp Evidence in Family Disputes

 Landmark Ruling Expands Digital Evidence Admissibility in Matrimonial Cases

In a groundbreaking judgment that could reshape how digital evidence is treated in family disputes, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has ruled that WhatsApp chats obtained through surveillance—even without consent—can be admitted as evidence in family court proceedings if they assist in resolving matrimonial disputes.

Case Background: Digital Surveillance in Marriage

The case of Smt. Anjali Sharma vs. Raman Upadhyay (M.P. No. 3395/2023)Decided On: 16.06.2025, involved a marriage that took place on December 1, 2016, with a daughter born in October 2017. Th dispute arose when the husband filed for divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, alleging cruelty and adultery.

Print Page

Supreme Court: Illegally obtained evidence is admissible

Following principles can be culled out.

(a) The test of admissibility of evidence lies in its relevancy.
(b) Unless there is an express or implied constitutional prohibition or other law, evidence placed
as a result of even an illegal search or seizure is not liable to be shut out.
(c) If deficiency in investigation or prosecution is visible or can be perceived by lifting the veil
which try to hide the realities or covering the obvious deficiency, Courts have to deal with the
same with an iron hand appropriately within the framework of law.
(d) It is as much the duty of the prosecutor as of the Court to ensure that full and material facts
are brought on record so that there might not be miscarriage of justice.
(e) In order to ensure that the criminal prosecution is carried on without any deficiency, in
appropriate cases this Court can even constitute Special Investigation Team and also give
appropriate directions to the Central and State Governments and other authorities to give all
required assistance to such specially constituted investigating team in order to book the real
culprits and for effective conduct of the prosecution
(f) While entrusting the criminal prosecution with other instrumentalities of State or by
constituting a Special Investigation Team, the High Court or this Court can also monitor such
investigation in order to ensure proper conduct of the prosecution.
(g) In appropriate cases even if the chargesheet is filed it is open for this Court or even for the
High Court to direct investigation of the case to be handed over to CBI or to any other
independent agency in order to do complete justice.
(h) In exceptional circumstances the Court in order to prevent miscarriage of criminal justice and
if considers necessary may direct for investigation de novo.



SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR AND FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM KALIFULLA, JJ.)

Bharati Tamang Vs. Union of India & Ors.

Citation;2014 CRLJ 156 SC

Print Page