Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2007 DIGILAW 717 (MAD)

Anusuya v. P. Pandiyan

2007-02-27

S.ASHOK KUMAR

body2007
Judgment :- Aggrieved over the order of the learned Subordinate Judge, Vellore in IA.No:6 of 2004 in HMOP.No:111 of 2003, this CRP has been filed. .2. The brief facts of the case are as follows: - .The petitioner is the wife of the respondent. They married on 5. 1997 according to Hindu rites and customs. Out of the wedlock, they have got three female children, now aged 17, 16 and 7 years respectively. While so, on 210. 2003, the respondent/husband filed a petition under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu marriage Act on the ground that the petitioner has married another person by name Ramesh Kumar and living in adultery and therefore prayed for a decree of divorce. The petitioner filed a counter denying all the said allegations. The petitioner filed an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act in I.A.No:6 of 2004 claiming a sum of Rs.3,000/= as maintenance for herself and Rs.2,000/= for her third daughter per month and a sum of Rs.5,000/= towards litigation expenses. The said application was contested by the respondent/husband and the learned Subordinate Judge, Vellore dismissed the application on the ground that the petitioner is living in adultery with the said Ramesh Kumar and therefore she is not entitled for maintenance. Aggrieved over the said order, this CRP is filed. .3. Mr. T. Karunakaran, learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner would contend that the learned Judge has come to a wrong conclusion based on a photograph which was filed by the respondent/husband in which the petitioner is seen along with the said Ramesh Kumar, who is residing as a tenant in a portion belonging to the petitioner and respondent. The learned Counsel would contend that the photograph is a distorted version of the original photograph and on the right side of the petitioner there is a another womans hand and the figure of the lady has been deleted and the photograph has been stage managed by using computer technology to show as if the petitioner with his daughter and the said Ramesh Kumar have taken the photograph separately. Learned counsel for the petitioner has produced an Photo Album in which the petitioner and the respondent and their children and Ramesh Kumar and his wife have gone on a Tour to Kodaikkanal, where several photographs have been taken. Learned counsel for the petitioner has produced an Photo Album in which the petitioner and the respondent and their children and Ramesh Kumar and his wife have gone on a Tour to Kodaikkanal, where several photographs have been taken. It is one of such photograph which has been used by the respondent by manipulating the photograph to show as if the petitioner and her child have taken separate photograph with the said Ramesh Kumar who was living in a portion of their house. When this argument was put forth by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the counsel for the respondent was directed to produce the original photograph produced by him before the Subordinate Court, Vellore. But, only a xerox copy of the photograph was produced by him before this court. The learned counsel for the respondent promised to produce the original photograph, but, in spite of giving three opportunities, he never turned up before this court which would only go to show that the respondent wants to hide the fraud played by him upon the court in securing an order by producing a manipulated photograph for the purpose of alleging that the petitioner is living in adultery with the said Ramesh Kumar who was none other than a tenant residing in a portion of their own house. .4. The learned Subordinate Judge, Vellore has passed the order by simply seeing the photograph and without recording any evidence. In these modern days, where computer technology has advanced to a great extent, it is very easy to prepare bogus photographs or create images connecting innocent persons with criminals or ordinary persons with celebrities by using such software by which such cutting and pasting and even 3D animation pictures could be developed. An allegation of adultery of a married woman with another person cannot be taken so lightly and has to be proved in a manner best known to law. In fact, it is also seen that the photograph produced before the Subordinate Judge, Vellore, is only the enlarged photograph (zooming of petitioner with her child and respondent alone) of one of the photograph found in the Photo Album produced by the petitioner. However, unless the authenticity of the photograph is proved scientifically, solitary reliance placed on such photographs in these days of advanced computer technology cannot be sustained. However, unless the authenticity of the photograph is proved scientifically, solitary reliance placed on such photographs in these days of advanced computer technology cannot be sustained. For these reasons, the order of the learned Subordinate Judge, Vellore, made in I.A.No.6 of 2004 in HMOP.No. 111 of 2003 is set aside and the respondent is directed to pay a sum of Rs.2,500/= as interim maintenance to the petitioner and a sum of Rs.1,000/= as interim maintenance to the third daughter from the date of filing of the petition. 5. With the above direction, the CRP is allowed. Consequently, connected CMPs are closed. No costs.