Overview
- The Supreme Court dismissed the husband’s appeal and declined to interfere with concurrent Family Court and Delhi High Court orders that require preservation and production of his hotel booking, payment and ID records and specified call detail records for sealed review.
- The Delhi High Court had relied on Section 14 of the Family Courts Act to permit family courts to receive non‑traditional evidence that may not strictly follow the Indian Evidence Act when it helps resolve a matrimonial dispute.
- Both high court and top court emphasized that the right to privacy under Article 21 is fundamental but not absolute, and it cannot be used to block evidence needed to prove adultery, a recognised ground for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act.
- Courts limited disclosure risks by ordering targeted preservation, restricting records to specified dates and sending documents to the court in a sealed cover to protect reputations and third‑party privacy.
- The judgment clears a path for family courts to weigh telecom and hotel records as circumstantial evidence in adultery claims and may prompt more preservation orders to secure short‑lived hotel data and call logs for adjudication.