Introduction

This is an important case on the topic of defamation and privileged communication between husband and wife.

Facts

• The daughter of M.C. Verghese was married to T.J. Ponnan (the respondent).
• On 18, 25, & 30 July 1964, Ponnan sent letters from Bombay to his wife Rathi, who was residing with her parents in Trivandrum.
• It is alleged that these letters contained statements damaging the reputation of Verghese (the appellant).
• However, when the letters were presented as evidence in court a decree for nullity of marriage of respondent and his wife became pending in court.
• This civil appeal was filed in the Supreme Court under Article 132 of the Constitution of India, 1950.

Issues Involved

• Whether the letters which formed the sole basis of the complaint are admissible in evidence or are they barred by law or expressly prohibited by law from disclosure?
• Whether uttering a libel by a husband to his wife amounts to “publication” under the Indian laws or not?

Observations

• The SC held that when the letters were written by the respondent herein to his wife, they were husband and wife.
• The court quoted that bar to the admissibility in evidence of communications made during marriage attaches at the time when the communication is made, and its admissibility will be adjudged in the light of the status at the date and not the status at the date when evidence is sought to be given in court.

Conclusion

• The SC allowed the appeal and set aside the judgement of the High Court of Kerela and remanded the trial back to the District Magistrate.

Note

• Section 500 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC)- Punishment for defamation. 
  • Whoever defames another shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
• Section 122 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872- Communications during marriage
  • No person who is or has been married, shall be compelled to disclose any communication made to him during marriage by any person to whom he is or has been married ; nor shall he be permitted to disclose any such communication, unless the person who made it, or his representative-in-interest, consents, except in suits between married persons, or proceedings in which one married person is prosecuted for any crime committed against the other.