Secretly Recorded Conversations Between Spouses Admissible in Matrimonial Disputes: Supreme Court

In a landmark ruling, the Supreme Court of India has held that secretly recorded conversations between spouses are valid and admissible as evidence in matrimonial cases. The apex court observed that the very act of one spouse snooping on the other reflects a breakdown in the marital relationship and, therefore, such material can be considered during legal proceedings.

A two-judge bench comprising Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma delivered the ruling, setting aside an earlier decision by the Punjab and Haryana High Court. The High Court had ruled that secret recordings between spouses fall under the purview of Section 122 of the Indian Evidence Act and thus could not be used in court.

However, the Supreme Court disagreed and reinstated the order of the Bathinda Family Court, which had previously allowed the husband to submit audio recordings as part of his evidence. The top court also directed the Family Court to resume proceedings by considering the recorded conversations.

Referring to the larger issue, the bench emphasised that surveillance or recording within a marriage signals a deep erosion of trust. “The fact that spouses are recording the conversations of each other is a proof in itself that their marriage is not going strong and hence can be used in the judicial proceedings,” the court noted.

Section 122 of the Indian Evidence Act states: “No person who is or has been married, shall be compelled to disclose any communication made to him during marriage by any person to whom he is or has been married.”

The case arose from a Bathinda Family Court decision where a husband presented a compact disc containing recorded phone calls with his wife to support his allegations of cruelty. The wife objected to this, claiming the recordings were made without her consent and violated her right to privacy. She challenged the use of such material before the Punjab and Haryana High Court.

The High Court had ruled in her favour, stating that secretly obtained recordings constituted a serious breach of privacy and thus were inadmissible. It argued that accepting such evidence would undermine the legal protection of private communications within a marriage.

But Justice Nagarathna, rejecting this argument, stated: “Some arguments have been made that permitting such evidence would jeopardise domestic harmony and matrimonial relationships as it would encourage snooping on the spouses, therefore infringing the objective of Section 122 of the Evidence Act.

"We don't think such an argument is tenable. If the marriage has reached a stage where spouses are actively snooping on each other, that is in itself a symptom of a broken relationship and denotes a lack of trust between them," she said.

This judgment sets a precedent by recognising that in circumstances where mutual trust has broken down, secretly recorded conversations may become essential tools in legal evaluation of matrimonial disputes .