Supreme Court endorses Delhi High Court view: Hotel booking and CDRs can be summoned in adultery cases

Introduction

In a significant ruling touching the contours of the fundamental right to privacy in matrimonial disputes, the Supreme Court in SA vs MA, Civil Appeal No. 400 of 2024, decided on July 2, 2026, upheld a Delhi High Court decision permitting a wife to obtain her husband’s hotel booking records and call detail records (CDRs) to substantiate allegations of adultery.

By affirming the judgment in Sachin Arora vs Manju Arora, Neutral Citation No.: 2023:DHC:3197, the Apex Court has effectively confirmed that a spouse’s right to lead relevant evidence in divorce proceedings—particularly when alleging adultery and cruelty—can, in appropriate circumstances, override competing privacy claims, provided adequate safeguards such as sealed cover production are employed.

Background of the dispute

Marriage and breakdown of relationship

The Delhi High Court, in the judgment authored by Hon’ble Ms Justice Rekha Palli, recorded the following foundational facts:

  • The parties were married on 04.12.1998 in accordance with Hindu rites and ceremonies.
  • A daughter was born to them on 15.07.2000.
  • Despite continuing to live in the same matrimonial home, serious disputes arose.
  • On 24.05.2022, the wife issued a legal notice alleging cruelty and domestic violence by the husband and, crucially, accusing him of indulging in an adulterous relationship with another woman.

Subsequently, the wife instituted a divorce petition under Section 13(1)(i) of the Hindu Marriage Act, citing adultery and cruelty. Her specific case was that the husband had stayed at Hotel Fairmont, Jaipur, from 29.04.2022 to 01.05.2022 in the same room with another woman and that woman’s daughter. She asserted that this stay was a key circumstance demonstrating adultery.

Relief sought by the wife

To substantiate her allegations, the wife approached the Family Court seeking:

  1. From Hotel Fairmont, Jaipur

    • Reservation records
    • Payment details
    • ID proofs relating to Room No. 219 for the period 29.04.2022 to 01.05.2022

  2. From telecom operators

    • Call detail records of two mobile numbers belonging to the husband, 9811484848 and 9310484848, for the period 01.06.2021 to 30.06.2022

Her contention was that:

  • The hotel documents would indicate whether the husband and the other woman (along with her daughter) shared the same room during the specified dates.
  • The CDRs would reveal the pattern, frequency and duration of calls, potentially indicating the nature of the relationship and lending weight to the adultery allegation.

Husband’s objections

The husband challenged these directions on multiple fronts, arguing that:

  • Summoning hotel records and CDRs would violate his right to privacy, protected as a fundamental right under the Constitution.
  • The request would also affect the privacy, dignity and reputation of the other woman, who was not a party to the matrimonial proceedings.
  • The disclosure of such records could cast unwarranted aspersions on the legitimacy and paternity of the minor daughter of the other woman.
  • The directions amounted to a fishing and roving inquiry, impermissible in law.

On these grounds, the husband approached the Delhi High Court invoking its supervisory jurisdiction, assailing the Family Court’s orders.

Orders of the Family Court

Direction to preserve and produce records

After hearing both sides, the Family Court on 14.12.2022 passed an order directing:

  • Hotel Fairmont, Jaipur to preserve and send in a sealed cover:
    • Reservation details
    • Payment details
    • ID proofs
      pertaining to **Room No.