The Madhya Pradesh High Court recently upheld the divorce granted to a man on the basis of photographs on a mobile phone showing alleged adultery of his wife and without insisting on a certificate under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act.

Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act deals with the admissibility of electronic records as evidence in court. For evidence taken from another device to be considered valid, a Section 65B certificate is required to be provided.

However, a Bench of Justice Vishal Dhagat and Justice BP Sharma said that the Indian Evidence Act is not strictly applicable to the matrimonial cases as a family court is allowed to receive any evidence. 

“As per Section 14 of Family Courts Act, a Family Court may receive as evidence any report, statement, documents, information or matter that may, in its opinion, assist it to deal effectually with a dispute, whether or not the same would be otherwise relevant or admissible under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Since, Indian Evidence Act is not strictly applicable in matrimonial cases and further Court had been given authority to receive any report, statement, documents in evidence to find out the truth. Thus, this Court do not find any error in the judgment passed by Family Court by placing reliance on the said photographs,” it ruled.

The wife, who appealed against the divorce decree, had argued that the alleged photographs were from a secondary device as her husband had broken the primary device, which was her mobile phone.

The Court noted that she had not denied that she was in the photographs but only stated that the pictures were fake.

“It has only been stated that said photographs have been created by using some trick; who has created these false photographs and by what method, has not been stated, only a general statement has been made to avoid confrontation with said photographs,” it said.

On the submission that the primary device was not available, the Court noted that the husband had broken it out of anger after transferring the photographs to his phone.

“Appellant had stated in her deposition that photographs were transferred from her mobile to mobile of husband, then husband has broken her mobile. Breaking of mobile of appellant appears to be natural. Husband had evidence of wife's adultery on her mobile phone. He transferred said pictures in his mobile phone. No person will like her wife to be in continuation of adultery, therefore, husband (respondent herein) broke mobile phone of wife (appellant herein) in anger and to stop her communication with paramour. Photographer who developed photographs was also examined in Court,” it said.

Considering the evidence available on record, the wife’s own admission and evidence of the person who had prepared the photographs, the Court said there was no merit in the appeal.

“Consequently, this first appeal filed by wife is dismissed,” it ordered.

Advocate Eshaan Datt represented the wife.