VIBHOR GARG versus NEHA

VIBHOR GARG versus NEHA

The High Court's order disallowing admission of the appellant's secretly recorded conversations was set aside and the Family Court order restored because (i) surreptitious recording does not per se bar admissibility; (ii) recorded conversations may be admitted if they meet the established three-fold test of relevance, identification and accuracy; (iii) Section 122 of the Evidence Act removes the privilege in proceedings between married persons, so spousal privacy under that provision does not bar such evidence; and (iv) Family Court was directed to admit the memory card/ CD and transcript as evidence subject to law and verification.

Parties
Appellant: Vibhor Garg; Respondent: Neha
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
14 July 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; impugned High Court order set aside and Family Court order restored
Legal Topics
Divorce, Spousal Privilege, Admissibility of Electronic Evidence, Right to Privacy, Surreptitious Recordings, Section 122 Evidence Act, Sections 65 A/65 B Evidence Act, Family Courts Act Discretion
Family Law Evidence Constitutional Law Privacy Law Divorce Spousal Privilege Admissibility of Electronic Evidence Right to Privacy +4 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Vibhor Garg

Appellant

Neha

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a secretly recorded conversation can be permitted to be given in evidence
  2. 2 Whether in light of the Evidence Act and the Family Courts Act a conversation between spouses can be permitted to be given in evidence in a proceeding for divorce
  3. 3 Whether such recorded evidence should be disallowed solely on the ground that it violates the privacy of one of the spouses

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court's order disallowing admission of the appellant's secretly recorded conversations was set aside and the Family Court order restored because (i) surreptitious recording does not per se bar admissibility; (ii) recorded conversations may be admitted if they meet the established three-fold test of relevance, identification and accuracy; (iii) Section 122 of the Evidence Act removes the privilege in proceedings between married persons, so spousal privacy under that provision does not bar such evidence; and (iv) Family Court was directed to admit the memory card/ CD and transcript as evidence subject to law and verification.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; impugned High Court order set aside and Family Court order restored

Orders

  • Impugned judgment dated 12.11.2021 passed by the High Court in CR No.1616 of 2020 (O & M) set aside
  • Order dated 29.01.2020 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bathinda restored