
Imbalance in tech access may cloud divorce cases
In deciding the matter, the SC relied on Section 122 of the Evidence Act, 1872 that states a person cannot be compelled to testify against their spouse in a criminal case. However, the section also carves out an exception for proceedings between the spouses. This exception, the court pointed out, allows one spouse to testify to their conversations against the other in a divorce case. In this context, the bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma equated the recording device to an eavesdropper. While the concept of spousal privilege and the efforts of the family courts are intended to protect a marriage, the SC noted that the very act of one spouse secretly recording the other showed the marriage had been damaged. Although high courts have said there is reasonable expectation of privacy within a marriage, the SC balanced the right to privacy with the right to a fair trial. Therefore, if the evidence can be independently verified, it is relevant and falls under the exception, and thus may be admitted.
Hashtags

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


The Hindu
9 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Pa. Ranjith seeks separate law to prevent caste-based crimes
Filmmaker Pa. Ranjith on Wednesday criticised the DMK and its allies for what he called 'ignoring the need for a separate law' to deal with caste-based crimes in the State after the brutal murder of Scheduled Caste youth Kavin Selvaganesh, a software engineer and son of school teacher on July 27. He urged the State Government to constitute a special committee comprising of SC activists, retired judge and intellectuals, akin to Retired Justice K. Chandru's committee that studied caste discrimination in schools, be to study and prevent honour killings. In statement, he pointed out that the District Collector has not visited the family of the victim despite being required to do so as per the provisions of the Prevention of Atrocity Act (Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes), and rued that the scheduled castes are having to fight for minimum form of justice even at times when media spotlights such atrocities. 'The current DMK government is displaying the same kind of apathy just as the previous government when it comes to handling Dalit-related cases. The law-and-order situation in the State has deteriorated on multiple fronts and the fact that the parents of the accused are police personnel raises serious concerns about how this case will be handled. The Tamil Nadu government must ensure a completely transparent investigation and arrest Surjith's parents without delay,' said Mr. Ranjith. Mr. Ranjith said the State government shouldn't just stop with providing government job to the victims' family but pay special focus to monitor districts where caste-crimes are high. 'Districts like Tirunelveli, Sivagangai, Pudukkottai, and Thoothukudi must be declared as 'atrocity-prone areas' under the provisions of the SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act and establish special police stations,' he said.


Time of India
25 minutes ago
- Time of India
Land-for-jobs case: Supreme Court refuses to defer Lalu Prasad's trial
The Supreme Court on Wednesday refused to entertain a plea filed by RJD president Lalu Prasad seeking deferment of trial court proceedings in the land-for-jobs case against him. Lalu moved the SC seeking directions to the trial court to adjourn proceedings till the Delhi High Court concludes hearing his petition to quash the case. Refusing to put brakes on the proceedings in the lower court, a division bench comprising Justices MM Sundresh and N Kotiswar Singh clarified that the trial court's framing of charges in the case would not render Lalu's quashing petition in the HC infructuous. "We are not passing any order. Taking note of the apprehension, we say framing of charges will not make the pending petition before the HC infructuous," the bench said. Explore courses from Top Institutes in Please select course: Select a Course Category Operations Management CXO Others Data Science Degree MBA Data Analytics Technology Management Public Policy Digital Marketing healthcare Product Management Design Thinking PGDM Cybersecurity Finance Artificial Intelligence Leadership MCA Project Management Healthcare others Data Science Skills you'll gain: Quality Management & Lean Six Sigma Analytical Tools Supply Chain Management & Strategies Service Operations Management Duration: 10 Months IIM Lucknow IIML Executive Programme in Strategic Operations Management & Supply Chain Analytics Starts on Jan 27, 2024 Get Details Lalu had moved an application in the top court seeking deferment of trial court proceedings in the land-for-jobs case at least till after August 12, when the Delhi HC is slated to hear his plea seeking quashing of the case. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like 15 most beautiful women in the world Undo Earlier this month, the apex court had refused to entertain a plea filed by Lalu to stay trial court proceedings in the land-for-jobs case in which he, his kin and other accused stand chargesheeted by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) over corruption and conspiracy. Lalu had moved the SC challenging a May 29 order of the Delhi High Court refusing to stay the trial court proceedings. Refusing to put brakes on the trial, a division bench comprising Justices MM Sundresh and N Kotiswar Singh on July 18 had said it would ask the Delhi HC to decide Lalu's plea that seeks quashing of the CBI case. The apex court then asked the high court to decide Lalu's plea expeditiously. Live Events ET had reported earlier this month that Lalu had moved an application in the trial court seeking to summon old records of the land-for-jobs case investigated by the CBI. The CBI has already concluded its arguments on framing of charges against Lalu, his kin and other co-accused.
&w=3840&q=100)

First Post
39 minutes ago
- First Post
US sanctions Brazilian Supreme Court judge Moraes over Bolsonaro case, cites human rights violations
The US imposed sanctions on Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes on Wednesday, accusing him of authorising arbitrary pre-trial detentions and suppressing freedom of expression read more Brazil's Supreme Court Minister Alexandre de Moraes talks during Brazil's Supreme Court trial over an alleged coup attempt, in Brasilia, Brazil on June 9, 2025. Reuters File The US imposed sanctions on Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes on Wednesday, accusing him of authorising arbitrary pre-trial detentions and suppressing freedom of expression. Moraes is overseeing the criminal case against former President Jair Bolsonaro, who has been charged with plotting a coup. US President Donald Trump has tied new tariffs on Brazil to what he called a 'witch hunt' against his right-wing ally. The announcement by the US Treasury Department follows Secretary of State Marco Rubio's statement in June saying Washington was considering sanctioning the judge. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Moraes was sanctioned under the Global Magnitsky Act, which allows the US to impose economic penalties against foreigners it considers to have a record of corruption or human rights abuses. 'Alexandre de Moraes has taken it upon himself to be judge and jury in an unlawful witch hunt against US and Brazilian citizens and companies,' US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in a statement. Moraes, he said, 'is responsible for an oppressive campaign of censorship, arbitrary detentions that violate human rights, and politicised prosecutions - including against former President Jair Bolsonaro.' Moraes recently ordered Bolsonaro to wear an ankle bracelet and stop using social media over allegations that he courted the interference from Trump. There was no immediate comment from Moraes or Brazil's Supreme Court. Earlier this month, Washington escalated tensions with the government of Latin America's largest economy, imposing US visa restrictions on Moraes, his family and other unnamed court officials. Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva denounced that move as 'arbitrary' and 'baseless,' and said foreign interference in the judiciary was 'unacceptable.' The leftist leader said in a statement that the US action violated fundamental principles of respect and sovereignty between nations. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The visa bans were a response to the Supreme Court's decision to issue search warrants and restraining orders targeting Bolsonaro, who is accused of plotting a coup to overturn the results of a 2022 election he lost. In a letter in mid-July, when Trump announced a 50% tariff on Brazilian goods starting August 1, he opened the message with criticism of Bolsonaro's prosecution. Bolsonaro has denied that he led an attempt to overthrow the government but has acknowledged taking part in meetings aimed at reversing the election's outcome.