The Madhya Pradesh High Court has upheld a decree of divorce granted on the ground of adultery, ruling that the absence of a certificate under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act does not invalidate the admissibility of photographs relied upon by the Family Court. The judgment arose from an appeal filed by a wife challenging the divorce decree passed against her, arguing that the images used to establish her alleged adulterous conduct were electronic records and, therefore, inadmissible without the mandatory certification required under the Evidence Act. The High Court, however, rejected this contention and held that matrimonial proceedings before a Family Court are not strictly bound by the technical rules of evidence that apply to regular civil or criminal trials.
The case originated from a petition filed under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, in which the husband sought divorce on the ground of adultery. The Family Court granted the decree in 2006 after accepting a set of photographs produced by the husband that appeared to depict the wife in compromising circumstances with another man. The wife denied the allegations and argued, both before the Family Court and later in appeal, that the photographs were fabricated and manipulated. She maintained that since these images were electronic in nature, their use without a 65B certificate rendered the entire proceedings illegal. She asserted that without such certification, the Family Court had no basis to rely on the photographs to dissolve the marriage, and that the decree should therefore be set aside.
The High Court carefully examined the wife’s objections and found no merit in her contentions. It noted that the wife did not dispute that she appeared in the photographs, nor did she provide any specific or credible explanation as to how they might have been manipulated. Her allegations of fabrication were vague, unsupported, and lacked any technical or factual foundation. On the other hand, the husband had presented testimony from the photographer involved in developing the photographs, as well as additional supporting evidence that strengthened the authenticity of the material. The Court observed that the photographs had been transferred from the wife’s mobile phone, which she later destroyed in anger, a fact that further weakened her claim that the electronic records were fabricated.
A crucial aspect of the Court’s reasoning centered on the nature and scope of proceedings under the Family Courts Act. The Court emphasized that matrimonial courts are empowered to adopt a flexible, truth-oriented approach and may receive any evidence that assists them in determining the real issues between the parties. Strict rules regarding the admissibility of electronic records, including requirements under Section 65B of the Evidence Act, do not rigidly bind family courts. Their purpose is to ascertain the truth in a sensitive and personal domain of law, and imposing the technical restrictions applicable to criminal trials or commercial disputes would defeat the very purpose of the Family Courts Act, which promotes expeditious and substantive justice.
The High Court reiterated that while electronic evidence ordinarily requires certification, the distinctive character of family law proceedings allows courts to rely on material even in the absence of such formalities, provided the material is credible and relevant. In this case, the photographs were consistent, corroborated, and unshaken by the wife’s vague allegations. The Court concluded that the Family Court had acted within its authority in admitting and relying on the photographic evidence.
On the merits, the High Court found that the Family Court’s conclusion regarding the wife’s adulterous relationship was justified. It observed that the cumulative circumstances established a breach of marital obligations, and the wife’s conduct, as demonstrated by the evidence, constituted valid grounds for divorce. Since the appellate challenge rested almost entirely on the technical objection regarding admissibility, and no substantive rebuttal to the findings of adultery was offered, the Court found no basis to interfere with the decree.
Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the wife’s appeal and affirmed the divorce decree. The judgment reinforces the principle that in matrimonial disputes, family courts possess wide discretion to admit and evaluate evidence in a manner that prioritizes factual truth over formal technical requirements. The ruling also serves as a significant clarification regarding the application of Section 65B in family law, underscoring that strict evidentiary rules must yield to the broader mandate of delivering substantive justice in sensitive interpersonal matters.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.