The Chhattisgarh High Court has rejected a petition filed by a person, seeking direction to reach his wife’s call record, which has been called “violation of privacy”.
In his petition before the court, the petitioner claimed that after marrying in 2022, the two “changed their wife’s behavior” after their parents ‘visit to their parents’ house and “abused” his mother and brother.
The man claims that he went to bring him back in September and October that year, but he refused, after which he contacted a lower court for restoration of conjugation rights (including right to live together, association and sexual relations) under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act. A week later, the woman lodged a police complaint, and later accused an application in court, the man’s parents and the brother of domestic violence.
In January 2024, the man approached the police demanding his wife’s call data record (CDR) and also filed a similar application in the family court, stating that he suspected of having “illicit relations” with his sister’s husband and “call detail records are necessary to certify the allegations of Adult”.
When the family court dismissed the petition, they approached the High Court, stating that there was no allegation of adultery in the divorce petition and reaching his call record would be a violation of the right to confidentiality of the defendant.
“Now by coming to the facts of the current case, it is clear that there is no allegation of adultery in the petition filed by the petitioner for the disintegration of marriage. Such allegations have been first made in written arguments. Also, in the application made by the petitioner’s petitioner, there was no recent charge.
The marriage did not give the husband “personal information of the wife, automatic access to communication and personal goods”.
The story continues below this advertisement
The court said, “The husband cannot force the wife to share their passwords of a cell phone or bank account and such an act would cause privacy and potentially a violation of domestic violence. There should be a balance between marital privacy and transparency needs as well as confidence in the relationship.”
The right to privacy, the bench said, “Conservation of personal intimacy, family life, marriage, purchase, purity of sexual orientation. Any intrusion in this right will be the amount for violation of the fundamental rights of a person”.
Petition.
