RAYALA M BHUVANESWARI Vs. NAGAPHANENDER RAYALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AFTER this revision was entertained, this Court, on 20. 7. 2007, passed an order requesting Shri Vilas Afzalpurkar, senior Advocate to be amicus curiae as an important question of law was involved and this Court would like to keep on record the valuable assistance provided by the learned Senior Counsel while hearing arguments in this case.

(2.) THE petitioner is respondent in i. A. No. 66 of 2006 in O. P. No. 833 of 2003 pending before the Family Court at hyderabad. The petitioner therein filed O. P. seeking a decree of divorce against the respondent-wife. During the hearing of the O. P. , he moved an application under section 45 of the Evidence Act. In this application, he submitted that in order to substantiate his case, he should be allowed to produce a hard disc relating to the conversation of his wife, recorded by him in United States of America (USA ). He also contended that the respondent had admitted the voice while she was being cross-examined with respect to Ex. P. 18, but she had denied some portions of the conversation. He stated that he wishes to send the hard disc to an expert to ascertain whether there was any alteration, insertion or addition. It appears that the recording was already produced in the Court by ex. P. 18 and the respondent was cross-examined. Because of her denial of certain portions, the petitioner wanted it to be sent to an expert. It was contested by the petitioner herein. The Family Court directed that admitted voice of the respondent be recorded by an expert on his equipment in the presence of both parties and then the admitted voice of the respondent be compared with the disputed portion of the conversation in Ex. P. 18. The wife is aggrieved of this order and, therefore, the revision has been filed.

(3.) CERTAIN astonishing facts have come to light during the hearing of this revision. One of the facts relate to the purity of the relation between the husband and wife. Without the knowledge of the wife, the husband was recording her conversation on telephone which she was making with her friends and parents in india. If the husband is of such a nature and has no faith in the wife even about her conversations to her parents, then the institution of marriage itself becomes redundant. There should be some trust between husband and wife and in any case, in my view, the right of privacy of the wife is infringed by her husband by recording her conversation on telephone to others and if such a right is violated, which is fundamental, can such husband, who has resorted to illegal means, which are not only unconstitutional, but also immoral, later on, rely on the evidence gathered by him by such means. Clearly, it must not be permitted.