⚖️ Password Sharing Is Domestic Violence: Chhattisgarh HC
The Chhattisgarh High Court has ruled that password sharing is domestic violence, stating that a husband cannot compel his wife to disclose her mobile phone or bank account credentials. Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey emphasized that such coercion violates the wife’s right to privacy under Article 21 of the Constitution and may trigger provisions under the Domestic Violence Act.
🔐 Right to Privacy Within Marriage
“Marriage does not grant the husband automatic access to the wife’s private information, communications and personal belongings,” the Court stated.
The Court cited landmark Supreme Court judgments including:
Mr. X v. Hospital Z (1998)
KS Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017)
People’s Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India (1996)
These cases affirm that privacy is a fundamental right under Article 21, encompassing personal intimacies and marital sanctity.
🧑⚖️ Case Background: Divorce Plea and CDR Request
| Detail | Description |
|---|---|
| Petitioner | Husband seeking divorce under Section 13(1)(i-a) of Hindu Marriage Act |
| Respondent | Wife denying cruelty allegations |
| Contested Issue | Husband demanded call detail records (CDR) and passwords |
| Court’s Finding | Vague suspicions do not justify privacy violations |
The High Court upheld the Family Court’s rejection of the husband’s plea for CDRs, stating that such demands breach constitutional protections.
🚫 Domestic Violence Implications
The Court observed that compelling a spouse to share passwords or private data can trigger provisions under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. It stressed the need for trust and transparency, but not at the cost of individual dignity.
💬 Vakilify Insight
This ruling reinforces that password sharing is domestic violence when used as a tool of control, and courts will treat such behavior as a violation of constitutional and statutory protections. Passwords, call records, and personal data are protected under Article 21, and coercion to access them may amount to domestic violence. Courts are drawing a clear line between transparency and intrusion.
🔗 Related Reading and Links
- 👉 Outbound: Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 – India Code
- 👉 Outbound: Supreme Court Judgment – KS Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017)
- 👉 Maintenance law clarity: Secretly Recorded Calls in Divorce Cases
