WhatsApp Chats Can Be Used in Divorce Cases, Even If Privacy Is Breached: Madhya Pradesh High Court

Parth Bajaj

On 18th June 2025, the Madhya Pradesh High Court held that WhatsApp chats can be admitted as evidence in family court proceedings, even if collected by violating a spouse’s privacy. The decision came in a matrimonial dispute where a husband had accessed his wife’s chats without her consent to prove allegations of adultery. The Court observed that in such sensitive matters, the right to a fair trial may take precedence over the right to privacy.

Justice Ashish Shroti, who delivered the judgment, emphasized that “while a litigating party certainly has a right to privacy, that right must yield to the right of an opposing party to bring evidence it considers relevant to court, to prove its case.” The Court invoked Section 14 of the Family Courts Act, which allows family courts to accept any material that may help in resolving the case, even if that material would not ordinarily be admissible under the Indian Evidence Act. The judge stressed that denying such evidence based on privacy concerns would defeat the purpose of the provision.

The Court clarified that although the Constitution guarantees the right to privacy, no fundamental right is unlimited. It explained that “the right to fair trial has wider ramifications and impacts public justice, which is a larger cause,” making it more significant in certain circumstances. The bench further pointed out that excluding relevant evidence at the outset could deny justice to a litigating party and weaken the overall fairness of the trial.

Still, the Court did not leave room for misuse. It issued clear directions for family courts to act cautiously while dealing with such evidence. Courts must verify the authenticity of chats or private communications and may conduct in-camera hearings to avoid unnecessary embarrassment. Additionally, any party harmed by the illegal collection of evidence can pursue independent legal remedies, but that would not stop the court from considering the evidence in question.

Case Name: Anjali Sharma v. Raman Upadhyay

Case Number: Miscellaneous Petition No. 3395 of 2023

Bench: Justice Ashish Shroti

Click here to access the order

Instagram: Click here

LinkedIn: Click here

For Collaboration and Business: info.desikaanoon@gmail.com