Family Conversations Secretly Recorded By Wife To Prove Domestic Violence And Cruelty Admissible In Evidence: Gujarat High Court

The Gujarat High Court has recently ruled that family conversations secretly recorded by a wife to substantiate her claims of domestic violence and cruelty against the husband, his family are admissible as evidence, adding that in "family matters" all such documents become admissible regardless of their relevance or if they can be proved as per the Indian Evidence Act.In doing so, the high court emphasized the relevance of such recordings, even if made without the husband's and in-laws' knowledge. A single judge bench of Justice Gita Gopi, in its July 16 judgment observed,“The identification of the voice would not be question, since it is the wife who is identifying the voice of husband and in-laws with whom she had stayed together during the matrimonial life. Though recording would be without the knowledge of husband and family members but the conversation between the persons recorded and placed on record by way of CD is relevant to the matter in issue of domestic violence. The wife by producing the hash value and Section 65B certificate as per the Indian Evidence Act has prima facie proved that there is no erasing or tampering in the recorded conversation.”For context hash value refers to a unique fingerprint for a specific digital evidence. Tape recorded conversations are admissible Referring to the Supreme Court's decisions in Sri Rama Reddy etc. v. Shri V.V. Giri (1970), and Yusufali Esmail Nagree v. The State of Maharashtra (1967), Justice Gopi observed that tape-recorded conversations are admissible provided the "conversation is relevant to the matters in issue", the voice is "identified", and the accuracy of the tape-recorded conversation is "proven by eliminating the possibility of erasure".The High Court noted that the petitioner, as a wife in the matter, produced a CD along with a transcript and a certificate under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act identifying the voices in the CD as hers, her husband's, and other family members.Conversation between family relevant in domestic violence caseCalling the conversation between the family members a "relevant matter", Justice Gopi said, "The petitioner as a wife wants to prove the cruelty which she faced in four walls of the matrimonial house. The identification of the voice would no be a question as recorded in the CD when the petitioner as a wife declares it to be the voice of the husband and other family members with whom she had been living alone from the date of her marriage. The accuracy of CD has been proved by placing on record the hash value," the high court said.The observation came in a woman's revision application challenging orders of a magisterial and sessions court which had rejected her plea for taking voice samples of her husband for "necessary technical comparison/examination through the forensic expert" in order to substantiate claims of cruelty under the Domestic Violence Act. The woman had recorded conversations with her husband and in-laws, presenting a CD as evidence of the cruelty she allegedly endured.Rejecting her plea, the magistrate court ruled that in the absence of any "express provision" under the law in force, "empowering the courts to order any person to undergo voice spectrograph test" such a direction cannot be passed. It also held that the order also cannot be passed since there was "no investigation of crime". The woman thereafter approached the sessions court which rejected her plea and made the magistrate court's order "absolute". She then approached the high court.In view of the Supreme Court's judgments in Ziyauddin Burhannuddin Bukhari v. Brijmohan Ramdass Mehra & Ors., (1975) and R.M. Malkani v. State of Maharashtra (1972) the high court said that the "CD produced on record would be admissible evidence".Object of DV Act to be kept in mind by Magistrates dealing with such casesJustice Gopi went on to highlight the importance of viewing proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act from a perspective that emphasizes the protection of women, including wives, as aggrieved individuals, and addresses respondents such as husbands and their family members. The Court emphasized that the proceedings aim to safeguard the rights of women who are victims of violence and to prevent the recurrence of domestic violence in society and to provide speedy remedy in civil laws. Calling upon the Magistrates dealing with DV cases to keep in mind the object of the Act, the high court said, "Thus, in view of that object, the Magistrates are given the authority under Section 28(2) to lay down its own procedure for the disposal of the application under Section 12 or sub-section (2) of Section 23. Every proceedings should be so conducted which would be inclusive in nature. The legislature has also intended to assist the Magistrate in discharge of the function of the Act to take the services of the protection officers". It further said that it is the protection officers' duty to assist the concerned Magistrate and to make a domestic...

Family Conversations Secretly Recorded By Wife To Prove Domestic Violence And Cruelty Admissible In Evidence: Gujarat High Court

Bhavya Singh

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Family Conversations Secretly Recorded By Wife To Prove Domestic Violence And Cruelty Admissible In Evidence: Gujarat High Court

Bhavya Singh

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers