Allahabad High Court allows husband to use WhatsApp chats as evidence of wife's adultery in maintenance case

The Allahabad High Court recently directed a trial court to allow a husband to bring on record certain WhatsApp chats to oppose his wife’s plea for maintenance on the ground of adultery.

Justice Madan Pal Singh noted that the WhatsApp chats were not accepted by the trial court solely on the ground that a certificate under Section 65-B of the Indian Evidence Act had not been submitted.

However, the Court said that Section 14 of the Family Courts Act provides that a family court may receive any evidence if it can assist it in effectively dealing with a dispute, whether or not such evidence would otherwise be relevant or admissible under the Indian Evidence Act.

“Consequently, the order dated 22.08.2025 passed by the trial court is not sustainable in the eyes of law and is accordingly set aside. The matter is remitted to the trial court for fresh consideration after hearing learned counsel for the parties and permitting the parties to adduce such evidence as may assist the court in effectively adjudicating the dispute in light of Section 14 of the Family Courts Act,” the Court said.

The trial court had earlier directed the husband to pay a maintenance amount  of ₹10,000 to his wife.

However, the husband in his revision plea before the High Court alleged that the trial court failed to consider his argument that she was “living in adultery” with another man

He wanted to bring on WhatsApp chats between her and that man to buttress his claim of adultery, a ground for denial of maintenance under Section 125 of Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).

As per the husband, the chats were “indecent in nature and indicative of physical intimacy between them.” 

The High Court said the trial court neither considered the same nor framed any specific issue on the point of adultery. 

“In view of the specific pleadings and supporting material filed by the revisionist, a specific issue ought to have been framed and adjudicated upon after considering the evidence on record,” it opined.

Thus, it allowed the revision and plea remanded the matter to trial court for fresh consideration in view of the legal clarification.

Advocates Atul Kumar and Kuldeep Singh Chahar appeared for the petitioner.

[Read Judgment]