-
by sayum
14 March 2026 5:31 AM
“Untested WhatsApp Messages Cannot Be Sole Basis to Prove Cruelty”, In an important ruling on the evidentiary value of electronic communication in matrimonial disputes, the Bombay High Court held that a decree of divorce cannot be granted merely on the basis of WhatsApp chats and SMS messages without proper proof and without giving the opposite party an opportunity to rebut the evidence.
Division Bench of Justice Bharati Dangre and Justice Manjusha Deshpande setting aside an ex-parte divorce decree granted by the Family Court, Nashik on the ground of cruelty under Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The High Court remanded the matter back to the Family Court for fresh adjudication after granting the wife an opportunity to contest the allegations and lead evidence.
The appeal was filed by the wife challenging an ex-parte judgment dated 27 May 2025 passed by the Family Court, Nashik in Petition No. A-185 of 2024, whereby the husband had been granted a decree of divorce on the ground of mental cruelty.
The Family Court relied primarily on WhatsApp chats and SMS exchanges between the parties, treating them as evidence of mental cruelty allegedly inflicted by the wife.
According to the Family Court’s observations, the chats showed that the wife had insisted that the husband shift from Nashik to Pune, and certain messages allegedly contained derogatory remarks against the husband’s sister and mother. On this basis, the Family Court concluded that such conduct amounted to mental cruelty and granted divorce.
However, the decree was passed ex-parte, without the participation of the wife in the proceedings.
The central question before the High Court was whether an ex-parte decree of divorce could be sustained when the finding of cruelty was based mainly on WhatsApp chats and SMS messages that were neither properly proved nor tested through cross-examination.
The appellant-wife argued that she was not given an opportunity to contest the allegations or rebut the electronic evidence relied upon by the husband, which violated the principles of natural justice.
WhatsApp Chats as Evidence
After examining the Family Court’s reasoning, the High Court noted that the divorce decree was primarily based on the “unchallenged testimony” of the husband supported by WhatsApp chats and SMS messages.
However, the Court emphasized that electronic evidence must be properly proved and subjected to scrutiny during trial before it can form the basis of a finding of cruelty.
The Bench observed: “Merely relying on the WhatsApp Chat, the divorce decree cannot be granted, since it is not proved by leading evidence.”
The Court held that without giving the wife an opportunity to explain or rebut the electronic material, reliance on such chats to dissolve a marriage was legally unsustainable.
Violation of Principles of Natural Justice
The High Court also stressed that the principles of natural justice require that both parties be given a fair opportunity to present their case and challenge the evidence relied upon by the other side.
Since the divorce decree was passed ex-parte without allowing the wife to contest the allegations, the Court held that the impugned judgment could not be sustained.
The Bench therefore concluded that the matter required fresh adjudication after recording evidence from both sides.
Matter Remanded to the Family Court
Setting aside the impugned judgment, the High Court remanded the matter to the Family Court, Nashik, directing it to determine all issues afresh after granting the wife an opportunity to contest the divorce petition and lead evidence.
The Court also granted the parties liberty to explore the possibility of settlement through mediation during the course of the remanded proceedings.
The judgment underscores that electronic communications like WhatsApp chats cannot automatically establish matrimonial cruelty unless they are properly proved in accordance with law and tested during trial.
By setting aside the ex-parte divorce decree, the Bombay High Court reaffirmed that procedural fairness and the opportunity to rebut evidence are fundamental to matrimonial adjudication.
Date of Decision: 27 February 2026