Digital Evidence In Divorce | Unverified Electronic Records Without Section 65B Certificate Fail To Prove Cruelty: Kerala High Court

"In the absence of evidence as required under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act [now Section 63 of Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam], the argument of the learned counsel for the appellant cannot be accepted." Kerala High Court, in a judgment dated 18 September 2026, held that electronic evidence, such as photographs obtained from social media, cannot be relied upon in matrimonial proceedings to prove allegations of cruelty or infidelity unless authenticated in accordance with statutory requirements.

A division bench comprising Justice K. Natarajan and Justice Johnson John observed that the failure to satisfy the mandate of the law regarding digital records renders such evidence inadmissible and insufficient to substantiate claims of marital discord.

The appellant-wife had challenged a Family Court judgment that dismissed her petitions for dissolution of marriage under Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and for the recovery of gold ornaments. The appellant alleged that the respondent-husband had subjected her to physical and mental cruelty, forcibly taken her gold ornaments, and maintained an illicit relationship with a third party. The Family Court dismissed the petitions, finding the appellant's testimonies contradictory and the evidence regarding infidelity unsubstantiated.

The primary question before the court was whether the appellant had successfully proven acts of mental and physical cruelty to warrant a decree of divorce. Furthermore, the court was called upon to determine the evidentiary value of digital photographs submitted to prove an alleged illicit relationship in the absence of technical certification.

The Court began its analysis by scrutinizing the foundational allegations of cruelty pleaded by the appellant. It noted that the appellant's testimony during cross-examination significantly contradicted her own pleadings. While the petition claimed that the husband forcibly snatched her gold ornaments after subjecting her to physical abuse and confinement, her oral evidence indicated that the ornaments were taken from an almirah without the use of force, thereby undermining the credibility of her entire case.

Court Rejects Inconsistent Testimony

The bench emphasized that matrimonial relief cannot be granted on the basis of unsubstantiated and shifting narratives. The court noted that in cases of serious allegations of physical cruelty, the absence of any contemporaneous police complaint further weakened the petitioner's stance. The discrepancies between the initial pleadings and the subsequent deposition led the court to conclude that the foundational facts pleaded were "cooked up."

Strict Compliance Required for Electronic Records

Regarding the photographs produced by the appellant to support her allegation of the husband’s illicit relationship, the court held that mere production of images taken from social media is insufficient. Citing the necessity for compliance with the statutory provisions governing electronic evidence, the court held that such materials remain inadmissible unless they meet the rigorous standards of authentication required under the law.

Requirement for Technical Authentication

The Court underscored that in the absence of valid certification or supporting evidence regarding the source and integrity of digital files, the court cannot draw an adverse inference against the respondent. The appellant's failure to examine the person featured in the photographs as a witness, coupled with the respondent’s specific contention that the images were fabricated, left the allegations of infidelity entirely unproven.

No Absolute Right Based on Separation

Addressing the appellant's reliance on the duration of separation, the court clarified that mere prolonged separation does not automatically entitle a party to a decree of divorce. The bench reiterated that while a separation period of six years is a relevant factor, the court must look at the cumulative effect of the attending facts and circumstances to determine if there is an irretrievable breakdown of the marriage.

Court Emphasizes Need for Parenting Plans

The bench further observed that in matrimonial disputes, the welfare of the child is paramount, and the absence of a structured parenting plan in the appellant's petition weighed against her claim for relief. Concluding that the appellant failed to establish the grounds of cruelty or the recovery of gold, the High Court upheld the dismissal of the petitions by the Family Court.

Date of Decision: 18 September 2026