Sued for sharing secrets? Why court dismissed man’s defamation case against prospective bride

“The disclosure of these details (personal) by the accused (woman) to her relatives will not constitute defamation because it was made for the protection of the interest of the accused, since her relatives are also entitled to know what kind of person she proposed to marry,” the June 3 order read.

Justice Rakesh Kainthla held that the woman’s act of discussing the man’s details with her relatives could not amount to defamation.

‘No case of defamation’

• The high court held that the woman’s act of discussing the man’s details with her relatives could not amount to defamation, since the disclosure was made to protect her interests while considering marriage.
• The court noted that the man himself admitted in his complaint that he and the woman had shared personal and intimate details while exploring a matrimonial alliance.
• The court observed that the parties had spoken over phone calls, exchanged messages and eventually met each other with the intention of assessing their compatibility for marriage. However, the proposed alliance did not materialise.
• The court further observed that no criminal action could be founded on information voluntarily shared by the man and which was later discussed with the woman’s family members.
• It also found that the allegations did not satisfy the ingredients of intentional insult, noting that the man had failed to show that any remarks allegedly made by the woman’s relatives were of such a nature as to provoke a breach of peace.
• Accordingly, the high court upheld the trial court’s conclusion that even if the allegations were accepted in their entirety, they did not disclose the commission of any cognisable offence.

Matrimonial talks, family scrutiny 

It was placed on record that the man and the woman had created profiles on a matrimonial website and connected in August 2022 after she accepted his request. Both were allegedly divorcees looking for a prospective life partner.

Thereafter, the families spoke to each other and considered the proposed alliance suitable. The man and woman exchanged phone calls and WhatsApp messages and discussed their past lives, future expectations and personal matters.

The man later travelled to Noida to meet the woman. According to the complaint, the two spent several hours together, and the woman allegedly asked him to undergo certain tests and discuss divorce-related documents.

The complaint further stated that the woman shared some of the man’s personal details with her maternal aunt, despite his objection.

According to the man, matters escalated when the woman took him to her maternal aunt’s residence, where her relatives questioned him about personal matters and accused him of discussing intimate topics with the woman. He also alleged that the woman’s father made remarks about his conversations with her concerning marriage and family planning.

Claiming that these disclosures and conversations had harmed his reputation, the man filed a criminal complaint alleging cheating, defamation and intentional insult.

The trial court dismissed the complaint, observing that meetings and discussions between prospective spouses are common in contemporary society and are aimed at assessing compatibility before marriage.

It held that merely meeting a prospective partner, travelling to meet them or spending money during such interactions would not constitute a criminal offence.

No bias in inquiry

• Representing the state, deputy advocate general Prashant Sen submitted that the magistrate had directed the police to conduct an enquiry. 
• It was added that the police conducted the enquiry and submitted the report to the court. 
• It was contended that there was no bias in the enquiry, and false allegations were made against the police and, therefore, the petition should be dismissed. 

‘She cheated me’

The petitioner in person submitted that the woman had cheated the complainant by inducing him to talk to her, travel to Noida and bear expenses for her shopping. 

The man argued that he had shared the intimate details with the accused, who then revealed them to her family members, who made fun of him by repeating them. 

He alleged that the woman’s family also falsely accused him of demanding to know intimate details about her.

He stated that he had filed various applications seeking action against the biased enquiry, but no orders were passed. 

Hence, he prayed that the present petition be allowed and the order passed by the trial court be set aside.