The Allahabad High Court has held that a specifically named alleged co-adulterer must receive an opportunity to be heard before a court records an adverse finding against that person.
The ruling came while dismissing a husband’s revision against monthly maintenance of ₹20,000 for his wife and ₹10,000 for their minor son. The court found that electronic material relied upon to allege adultery had not been satisfactorily authenticated and could not conclusively establish the charge.
In its 13 October 2026 judgment, the court affirmed the Family Court’s maintenance order but identified a procedural gap in Section 125 proceedings. It directed the Registrar General to place the issue before the Chief Justice for considering rules governing impleadment or notice to a named alleged co-adulterer. The court stressed that natural justice protects a person from condemnation without hearing, regardless of the ultimate merits.