A Bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Vipul M Pancholi raised the issue while dealing with a matrimonial dispute in which a husband had produced a large number of photographs and videos to allege that his wife was living in adultery.
The husband had opposed his wife's claim for maintenance under Section 125 CrPC, alleging that she was in an extramarital relationship.
To support his claim, he produced around 92 videos and 237 photographs which allegedly showed his wife pursuing a relationship outside the marriage.
The volume and nature of the material prompted the Court to question how such photographs and videos were collected and whether private investigators had been engaged for the purpose.
The Court also noted that the husband had said he had received the photographs, suggesting that someone else had taken them.
A Bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Vipul M Pancholi raised the issue while dealing with a matrimonial dispute in which a husband had produced a large number of photographs and videos to allege that his wife was living in adultery.
The husband had opposed his wife's claim for maintenance under Section 125 CrPC, alleging that she was in an extramarital relationship. To support his claim, he produced around 92 videos and 237 photographs which allegedly showed his wife pursuing a relationship outside the marriage.
The volume and nature of the material prompted the Court to question how such photographs and videos were collected and whether private investigators had been engaged for the purpose.
The Court also noted that the husband had said he had received the photographs, suggesting that someone else had taken them.
