Can a husband be forced to pay maintenance even if he claims his wife is in an adulterous relationship? The Allahabad High Court has now opened the door for WhatsApp chats to be considered in such disputes.
PRAYAGRAJ: The Allahabad High Court has allowed a husband to place WhatsApp chats on record to oppose his wife’s maintenance claim by alleging adultery. The deci sion brings much-needed clarity in cases where men claim they are being made to pay maintenance despite serious allegations against the wife.
The case was heard by Justice Madan Pal Singh, who examined the grievance of a husband challenging a trial court order. Earlier, the trial court had directed him to pay ₹10,000 per month as maintenance to his wife. However, the husband argued that she was not entitled to maintenance as she was “living in adultery” with another man.
To support his claim, the husband wanted to submit WhatsApp chats between his wife and the other man. According to him, the chats were “indecent in nature and indicative of physical intimacy between them.” These chats, he argued, were crucial evidence to show that she was disqualified from claiming maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).
However, the trial court refused to accept these chats. The only reason given was that the husband had not filed a certificate under Section 65-B of the Indian Evidence Act, which is generally required for electronic evidence.
When the matter reached the High Court, Justice Madan Pal Singh took a different view. He pointed out that under Section 14 of the Family Courts Act, a Family Court is empowered to receive any evidence if it helps in effectively deciding the dispute, even if such evidence may not strictly comply with the technical requirements of the Indian Evidence Act.
The High Court observed that the trial court had not even framed a proper issue regarding the allegation of adultery.
It stated:
“In view of the specific pleadings and supporting material filed by the revisionist, a specific issue ought to have been framed and adjudicated upon after considering the evidence on record.”
The Court further held:
“Consequently, the order dated 22.08.2025 passed by the trial court is not sustainable in the eyes of law and is accordingly set aside. The matter is remitted to the trial court for fresh consideration after hearing learned counsel for the parties and permitting the parties to adduce such evidence as may assist the court in effectively adjudicating the dispute in light of Section 14 of the Family Courts Act.”
With this, the High Court set aside the earlier order and sent the matter back to the trial court for fresh consideration. The trial court will now hear both sides again and allow evidence that can help in properly deciding the dispute.
Explanatory Table of All Laws and Sections Mentioned in the Case
| Law / Section | Provision | What It Means | Role in This Case |
| Section 125 Cr.P.C. | Maintenance to wife, children, parents | Allows wife to claim monthly maintenance if she cannot maintain herself | Wife was granted ₹10,000 per month by trial court; husband challenged it on ground of adultery |
| Section 65-B, Indian Evidence Act | Admissibility of electronic evidence | Requires certificate for electronic records like WhatsApp chats | Trial court rejected chats because certificate was not filed |
| Section 14, Family Courts Act | Relaxed rules of evidence in family matters | Family Court can accept any evidence helpful for deciding dispute, even if not strictly admissible under Evidence Act | High Court held chats could be considered despite lack of 65-B certificate |
| Section 12, Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act | Application seeking relief under DV Act | Enables woman to seek protection and monetary relief | Trial court considered related proceedings but ignored adultery plea |
| Section 354(6) Cr.P.C. | Requirement of reasoned judgment | Court must frame proper issues and give findings | High Court held specific issue on adultery should have been framed |
Case Details
- Case Title: ABC vs State of U.P. and Another
- Case Number: CRIMINAL REVISION No. – 6409 of 2025
- Court: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- Court No.: 85
- Bench: Hon’ble Madan Pal Singh, J.
- Counsel for Revisionist(s): Kuldeep Singh Chahar
- Counsel for Opposite Party(s): G.A.
- Impugned Order Date: 22.08.2025
- Trial Court: Principal Judge, Family Court, Mathura
- Maintenance Amount Ordered by Trial Court: Rs. 10,000/- per month
- Date of High Court Judgment: February 17, 2026
Key Takeaways
- Maintenance cannot be granted mechanically under Section 125 Cr.P.C. if the husband has specifically alleged that the wife is living in adultery.
- Family Courts are empowered under Section 14 of the Family Courts Act to consider relevant material even if strict technical requirements like Section 65-B certificate are not filed.
- Ignoring WhatsApp chats and refusing to frame an issue on adultery amounts to denial of natural justice to the husband.
- Courts are obligated to frame proper issues and adjudicate on all material pleadings; failure to do so makes the order legally unsustainable.
- This judgment reinforces that men have a right to present digital evidence in their defence and cannot be burdened with financial liability without full and fair examination of facts.
This Could Change Your Case-Get FREE Legal Advice-Click Here!
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the Indian courts and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of “ShoneeKapoor.com” or its affiliates. This article is intended for informational and educational purposes only. The content provided is not legal advice, and viewers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel. Viewer discretion is advised.