
'Right To Be Left Alone': Delhi Court Upholds Wife's Privacy After Major's Plea For Hotel CCTV
Last Updated:
A Delhi court rejected an Army Major's plea for hotel CCTV footage to prove his wife's alleged affair, citing the right to privacy.
A Delhi court on Friday rejected a plea by a man and upheld the right to privacy of his wife, whom he alleged was having an affair with a man.
The man identified himself as Major in the Indian Army and sought the CCTV footage of a hotel, where he alleged his wife was with another man, also a Major.
'The right to privacy and to be left alone in a hotel would extend to the common areas as against a third party who was not present there and has no other legally justifiable entitlement to seek the data of the guest. The same would hold good for the booking details," civil judge Vaibhav Pratap Singh of Patiala House Court observed, as he upheld the right to privacy of the wife and her alleged lover.
He added that the concept of 'stealing' the affection of a wife by another man, as if a woman is not in control of whom she loves, is 'dated" and has been rightly rejected by the Supreme Court Joseph Shine v. Union of India.
'The dated idea of a man stealing away the wife of another man, without ascribing any role or responsibility to the woman, is to be rejected. It takes agency away from women and dehumanises them," the judge said.
The court also cited the novel 'The End of the Affair' by Graham Greene, and said that even the Indian Parliament has given its imprimatur to the said jurisprudence when, while doing away with the colonial penal law, it enacted the The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and did not retain therein the offence of adultery, showing that the 'modern day Bharat has no place for gender- condescension and patriarchal notions."
As the major alleged his wife, with whom he was involved in a marital dispute and divorce, visited the hotel with her alleged paramour, the judge observed that hotels generally owe a duty of confidentiality to their guests and are required to protect the privacy of their records, including booking details and CCTV footage.
The court also said that the wife and her alleged paramour were central to the husband's claims, but they were not impleaded in the suit, which raised significant questions about their right to be heard before any disclosure was made.
Further, the judge said that courts are not meant to serve as investigative bodies for private disputes or as instruments for the collection of evidence in internal proceedings, especially when no clear legal entitlement to that evidence exists.
First Published:
May 24, 2025, 11:12 IST
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Time of India
31 minutes ago
- Time of India
Telangana HC junks plea challenging Harish Rao's election win
Hyderabad: The Telangana high court on Tuesday dismissed an election petition challenging the election of T Harish Rao as MLA from Siddipet Assembly Constituency, calling the allegations vague, baseless and lacking material facts. Justice K Sarath pronounced the order while allowing an interlocutory application filed by Harish, who urged the court to reject the election petition filed by his political rival, G Chakradhar Goud, who had contested against Harish in Siddipet. Chakardhar had alleged malpractices, including improper acceptance of nomination, suppression of criminal cases and discrepancies in property disclosures. The court noted that Chakardhar failed to raise objections during scrutiny or provide evidence of improper nomination acceptance. The MLA had disclosed pending criminal cases and convictions in his affidavit (Form 26), while the petitioner provided no specifics on alleged suppression. The complainant's claims that agricultural land was misrepresented as non-agricultural land lacked authenticated revenue documents, the court said. Though he made allegations against Harish's poll expenditure, he did not submit records or demonstrate violations. The judge also looked at allegations of manipulated voting percentages (45% to 85% in an hour) and said that there was no booth-wise data or copies of the complaints made to the authorities to substantiate these allegations. The election petition lacked concise material facts as required under the Representation of the People Act, 1951, the judge said. He also said that Chakaradhar's reliance on unverified WhatsApp audio and video clips without corroborative evidence was insufficient. Citing Supreme Court precedents in Kanimozhi Karunanidhi, Harishankar Jain cases, the judge said bald allegations without triable issues warrant summary dismissal.


Time of India
31 minutes ago
- Time of India
Retired scientist duped of Rs 1.3 cr after threats, fake SC hearing
Hyderabad: A 73-year-old retired scientist lost Rs 1.34 crore after being duped by cyber fraudsters into attending a virtual hearing of a fake Supreme Court on trumped-up human trafficking charges. According to Rachakonda cyber crime police, the scientist had received an unsolicited phone call from a man pretending to be a policeman from Karnataka. He was told that his Aadhaar was found to have been used by human traffickers sending Indians to cyber slavery camps in Myanmar, Laos and Cambodia. The scientist refuted the allegations, but he was threatened with arrest, police said. The caller then connected him to a fake CBI officer, who in turn directed the scientist and his wife to attend the fake Supreme Court hearing virtually. "They asked him to follow court rules once connected through a video call. Assuming that it was true, they followed the instructions by someone impersonating the Chief Justice of India on WhatsApp call," a cop said. As part of verification, the scientist was told to transfer money into bank accounts of the fraudsters, who promised that it would be returned once they had checked details. But when the scientist did not receive the money and the phone numbers went unanswered, he lodged a complaint with police on June 6. Police have registered a case of extortion, criminal breach of trust, cheating by impersonation and forgery under BNS sections.


NDTV
4 hours ago
- NDTV
Supreme Court Refuses To Reduce Lawyer's Sentence For Abusing Woman Judge, Says...
New Delhi: The Supreme Court today rejected a petition by a lawyer convicted of abusing a woman judicial officer in a court in Delhi. The top court refused to reduce the imprisonment sentence to 6 months and said, "Today, the majority of our officers in Delhi are women. They will not be able to function if somebody can get away like this. Think of their state," the bench commented orally. The bench of Justice PK Mishra and Justice Manmohan was hearing a plea against the order of the Delhi High Court, which upheld the conviction of a lawyer who used abusive language towards a woman judge in a challan matter inside the trial court. The lawyer used abusive, vulgar expletives after the judge had adjourned the matter. While hearing the plea, Justice Manmohan verbally remarked, "Just see the inspection report, the language used, we cannot even say in the open court". Justice Manmohan further said that if a stern view is not taken against such behaviour, women judicial officers would not be ensured a safe work environment. "Today, the majority of our officers in Delhi are women. They will not be able to function like this- if somebody can get away like this. Think of their state," the bench said. The lawyer, Sanjay Rathore, was convicted by the trial court and sentenced to 18 months' imprisonment for the offence under Section 509 (intending to outrage modesty of a woman) of the Indian Penal Code, 3 months under Section 189 (injury to public servant), and an additional three months under Section 353 (assault or criminal force against public servant to deter them from their duty). The trial court directed that the sentences would run consecutively, resulting in a total sentence of two years. Later, the High Court said that the sentence would run concurrently and not consecutively, reducing his sentence to 18 months from two years The counsel for the petitioner urged the Supreme Court bench to reduce his term of imprisonment to six months. He stressed several "mitigating factors" for this consideration, like his ageing parents and young children. He informed that the Bar Council has also acted against the lawyer.