Man claims wife had affair, court orders woman to submit voice samples to verify
The Aurangabad bench of the Bombay High Court has directed a woman to give her voice sample to verify her estranged husband's claim about an extra-marital affair, saying with the advent of technology, electronic evidence is replacing the conventional one.A bench of Justice Shailesh Brahme, in the order passed on May 9, said under the Domestic Violence Act, there are no provisions to direct a party to provide voice samples, but the proceedings in the present case are both quasi-civil and quasi-criminal.advertisementThe order was passed on a man's plea seeking a direction to his estranged wife to give her voice sample to be referred to a forensic laboratory for verification of voice recordings he submitted in the matrimonial dispute to prove that she was having an extra-marital affair.
The court said the woman was bound to give her voice sample for verification, as the electronic evidence relied upon by the man has a probative value.It also refused to accept the woman's argument that the memory card and CD her estranged husband submitted were not admissible in evidence, as the original cell phone in which the alleged voice recording was done was unavailable.Justice Brahme said all this can be considered by the trial court."Due to the advent of technology, electronic evidence is replacing conventional evidence, and hence, there is a need to invest more powers to a magistrate who is a fact-finding authority," the court said.advertisementThe court further held that in proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act, the parties are not informant and accused in the sense of criminal jurisprudence, as they are in a domestic relationship.The woman had filed a complaint before a family court against her husband and in-laws, alleging harassment under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act.The man, in his defence, submitted a memory card and CD to the family court with voice recordings of his wife and her alleged paramour.The woman refuted the allegations and said it was not her voice in the recordings.He filed an application before a magistrate's court at Parner in Ahilyanagar district seeking a direction to his wife to give her voice sample. The magistrate rejected the application, after which he moved the HC.The high court quashed the magistrate court's February 2024 order and directed the woman to give her voice sample within three weeks.It said the sample shall be referred to the forensic laboratory for verification.Tune InMust Watch
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
5 hours ago
- The Hindu
Patanjali Foods moves Bombay High Court over land encroachments in Raigad
Patanjali Foods Private Limited has approached the Bombay High Court seeking directions to the Maharashtra government and its authorities to remove structures allegedly constructed and occupied illegally on the company's land at Patalganga, Savroli Kharpada Road, in Khalapur taluka of Raigad district. There are eight respondents named in the matter. The petition has arrayed the Maharashtra government and its statutory authorities — including the Special Planning Authority and the local Tehsildar — holding them responsible for safeguarding the land against encroachments and ensuring eviction of unauthorised occupants. The chief engineer and deputy executive engineer have also been named for allegedly allowing the encroachment and providing electricity connections to the illegal constructions. The petition accuses specific individuals — Sunil Malsure of illegally constructing a local politician's office (referred to as an SM office), Mayur Ravindra Devghare of building a hotel, and Sudesh Khandagale of erecting a tyre puncture repair shop on the said land. Advocate Apoorv Srivastava, appearing for the petitioner, submitted told The Hindu that despite raising the issue through meetings and written representations, government authorities had failed to take cognisance. 'By not taking any action, the authorities have allowed the illegal encroachers to unlawfully use, occupy and take possession of the land that belongs to Patanjali,' he said. The plea stated that, aggrieved by the inaction of the respondent authorities, the company was 'forced to approach the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950,' and sought a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate directions directing the concerned authorities to initiate action against the alleged encroachers and trespassers. 'Illegal encroachments on the subject lands have increased from the date of purchase until today, and yet the respondents and its concerned authorities have shown no interference in the administration of the areas within its local limits and have allowed such miscreants to extend their hutments illegally to its full enjoyment on private land owned by the petitioners,' the petition stated. It further added that this situation 'has posed a great threat to the lives of the people associated with the petitioner's factory.' With regard to the tyre puncture shop, the company submitted that the unit operates an air-filling machine that poses a significant hazard. 'Any malfunction or mishap involving the said machine has the potential to cause grave disruptions to the factory's operations, extensive damage to its machinery, and possible loss of life or injury to its workers,' it said. The petition also claimed that Patanjali staff had found it difficult to remove the trespassers. 'They are reluctant to vacate the subject land, and there are apprehensions that they shall keep on illegally constructing one or the other structure on the subject land without any fear of the authorities,' the company stated. 'I will mention the matter in the coming week for an urgent hearing before the appropriate Bench,' Mr. Srivastava said. The matter is likely to be placed before a Division Bench comprising Justice Girish Kulkarni and Justice Arif Doctor.
Indian Express
6 hours ago
- Indian Express
'Before it's too late': HC orders Thane commissioner to survey and take actions against illegal constructions across wards
Expressing 'shock' over proliferation of illegal constructions and delay in actions, the Bombay High Court has directed the Thane Municipal Corporation (TMC) Commissioner to conduct a survey of all illegal structures across its wards including developing areas and green zones and act against them 'before it is too late.' The HC on Thursday warned the civic body that if illegalities continue and it is unable to take action against the same, the court will have to consider whether the TMC would be required to be governed by a 'different/separate machinery' under Municipal laws. A bench of Justices Girish S Kulkarni and Arif S Doctor ordered immediate inspection of seventeen unauthorised structures/buildings in TMC area by the court-appointed officer and separate inquiry into the role of errant municipal officers in aiding such constructions. 'The situation is so serious that it would be difficult to believe that there is at all any rule of law when it comes to illegal constructions and whether the TMC is at all alive to what is happening under its feet and under the blessings of its officers,' the HC noted. The HC was hearing a plea by one Subhadra Ramchandra Takle, a senior citizen, who, through advocates A H Modi and Shafik Ahmed, claimed that her nearly five-and-half acre land in Mumbra area was grabbed by 'land mafia or sharks' without any permission from planning authority and 17 unauthorised structures were erected on it. 'Such construction could not have come up except with the blessings of the government and municipal officers. It is also shocking that the persons who have rampantly undertaken such construction could spend such huge amounts in undertaking such brazen illegal construction and ultimately to defraud innocent flat purchasers to purchase flats/tenements in such construction,' the bench noted. 'We may observe that those who purchase tenements in illegal construction are greedy purchasers, who are a different category of citizens as opposed to those citizens who would purchase tenements which are lawfully constructed, they cannot assert rights in regard to illegal construction,' the HC added. The court expressed 'shock' over TMC's reply and questioned why the civic body was delaying action despite being aware of illegalities on petitioner's land. The bench said the matter was 'serious' as it was 'clear case of land grabbing' with complaints 'having fallen to the deaf ears of municipal officers.' The court said it 'cannot overlook complete abdication of petitioner to the rule of law, at the hands of municipal authorities and citizens taking law into their hands' to put up illegal constructions. The HC directed the court-appointed officer to conduct immediate inspection of petitioner's land in presence of TMC commissioner with police protection and submit a report before next hearing on June 19. The bench further ordered a senior judicial officer to inquire into the role of all municipal officers responsible for such constructions and an inquiry report be produced before the court within six weeks. The court will pass orders on the outcome of both the reports. It added that the green zones and areas within which no construction is permissible ought to be safeguarded and if illegal structures come up on such lands, the same should be immediately removed as per law. The bench sounded a 'note of caution' that if 'gross illegality wantonly persists,' it will have to consider whether the corporation is functioning as per law. In such event, if TMC fails to follow its duties and obligations, the HC went on to note, 'the TMC would be required to be governed by a different/separate machinery which has also been provided under the provisions of the Maharashtra Municipal Corporation Act, for which the state government would be required to be directed to take appropriate steps if the need so arises.'
Hindustan Times
a day ago
- Hindustan Times
HC rejects Firoz Nadiadwala's plea to dismiss ₹24-crore suit over film financing dispute
MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court on Monday rejected a plea by filmmaker Firoz A Nadiadwala seeking dismissal of a ₹24-crore commercial suit filed against him on grounds that he was never formally served a writ of summons. Justice Abhay Ahuja, who heard the matter, observed that since Nadiadwala had already appointed lawyers and was represented by senior counsel during earlier proceedings, formal service of summons was not required under the law. The case stems from a financing agreement dated July 16, 2015, between Nadiadwala and businessman Anil Dhanraj Jethani, who had agreed to fund a film production. Jethani later filed a suit on August 19, 2015, to recover ₹24 crore, alleging non-payment of dues. On September 1, 2015, the high court passed a consent order permitting Jethani to withdraw ₹12.5 crore deposited by another defendant. The remaining amount was to be paid by Nadiadwala before the release of his upcoming film Welcome to the Jungle, which was initially scheduled for December 28, 2024, but has since been delayed. Following the enactment of the Commercial Courts Act in October 2015, the suit was reclassified as a commercial case. Nadiadwala later moved an application arguing that he had never been served a summons, and therefore, all subsequent orders—including the consent order—were invalid and contrary to the Civil Procedure Code. His counsel further pointed out that Jethani had not taken any steps to issue or serve a writ of summons for over seven years and contended that the financing agreement remained unsigned by one party, raising questions about its enforceability. Countering the claim, Jethani's senior counsel argued that once a defendant enters an appearance during interlocutory proceedings or files a vakalatnama, formal service of summons is no longer necessary. He accused Nadiadwala of acting in bad faith and attempting to evade a binding commitment made to the court. The court noted that Nadiadwala had received copies of the plaint and exhibits on August 20, 2015, and that his legal team had participated in hearings on August 24 and 28 that year. It held that his participation established his awareness of the proceedings and dismissed his application accordingly.
