We Are Living In An Era Of Deepfakes: Delhi HC Refuses To Rely On Photos Produced By Husband In Maintenance Case To Show Adultery By Wife
The Delhi High Court acknowledging the threat posed by deepfakes, refused to rely on photos produced by the Husband in appeal against an order to pay maintenance to his wife, to claim that his wife is living in adultery. The Court held that the photos would have to be proved by evidence before the Family Court.
The Court held that while noting that the photographs submitted by the husband did not clearly establish the presence of the respondent/wife in the photographs.
The Court was hearing an appeal against the judgment and order whereby the application filed by the respondent/wife under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 was disposed of.
The bench of Justice Rajiv Shakdher and Justice Amit Bansal observed, “we are living in the era of deepfakes and, therefore, this is an aspect that the appellant/husband, perhaps, would have to prove by way of evidence before the Family Court.”
In the impugned judgment, the Family Court ordered the appellant to pay Rs.75,000/- monthly to the respondent, with a yearly increase of 7%. This maintenance covers both the respondent and their five-year-old daughter. Despite the appellant's claim of earning Rs.40,000/- to Rs.41,000/- monthly, the Family Court found discrepancies between his stated income and his bank transactions.
The Court noted that the appellant/husband is a professional architect and has set up his own company for rendering professional services.
The Court further noted that the respondent/wife is a post–graduate in Mass Communication and has been living with her parents and is not employed.
It was submitted to the Court that the wife was living in adultery and in support of its submission certain photographs were appended to the appeal.
The Court also noted that the allegations of adultery were not mentioned in the impugned judgment.
Accordingly, the Court found no merit in the appeal.
Consequently, the Court dismissed the appeal.
Cause Title: X v. Y (Neutral Citation: 2024:DHC:4693-DB)
Appearance:
Adv. Prateek Goswami
