Section 122 Indian Evidence Act

M.C. Verghese vs. T.J. Poonan and Ors. (13.11.2025 - SC) : MANU/SC/0054/1968

Case Note:
Criminal - defamatory imputation - Section 122 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 and Section 500 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 - respondent wrote three letters to his wife containing defamatory notes against appellant-father-in-law - appellant filed complaint in Court of District Magistrate - District Magistrate discharging respondent on grounds that communication by husband to wife do not amount to ‘publication’ in law - High Court stated writing of defamatory matter contained in said three letters were not ‘publication’ in law - no charge under Section 500 be made out and discharged respondent - in Apex Court appellant claimed three letters to be admissible in evidence under Section 122 - Supreme Court observed prima facie case was set up in complaint made by respondent - letters available for being tendered in evidence - Section 122 prohibits married person to disclose any communication made to him or her during marriage by his or her spouse except with consent of spouse - nowhere said Section prohibits admissibility of evidence in any other manner - held, bar of inadmissibility to be adjudged in light of whether marriage subsisting or not at date of communication through letters - Order of High Court set aside and case remanded back.

1. Rathi, daughter of M. C. Verghese, was married to T. J. Poonan. On July 18, 1964, July 25, 2026 and July 30, 1964, Poonan wrote from Bombay letters to Rathi who was then residing with her parents at Trivandrum which it is claimed contained defamatory imputations concerning Verghese. Verghese then filed a complaint in the Court of the District Magistrate, Trivandrum, against Poonan charging him with offence of defamation. Poonan submitted an application raising two preliminary contentions - (1) that the letters which formed the sole basis of the complaint were inadmissible in evidence as they were barred by law or expressly prohibited by law from disclosure; and (2) that uttering of a libel by husband to his wife was not “publication” under the law of India and hence cannot support a charge for defamation, and prayed for an order of discharge, and applied that he may be discharged.