In a recently filed lawsuit in a federal court by Mr. Chaudhry against his wife, Mrs. Chaudhry accusing her of covertly recording private conversations between him and a third party. This new chapter in the ongoing legal dispute between the couple, who have been separated since approximately July 2022, has drawn attention to issues surrounding privacy, consent, and the admissibility of evidence in divorce proceedings. The case will likely hinge on the legality of such recordings, whether they were made without Mr. Chaudhry’s knowledge or consent, and if they were used to gather evidence in the divorce proceedings. This accusation comes at a time when the couple’s divorce case, which has now stretched over two years, remains unresolved.

Per the complaint, Las Vegas resident Mr. and Mrs. Chaudhry were married in 2001 in Lahore, Pakistan. Mr. Chaudhry has alleged his wife, Mrs. Chaudhry, illegally recorded hours of communication between him and his friends or associates.  Further, Mr. Chaudhry alleges that his wife did this to use the recordings as means to divorce-plan and to alienate his adult children from him and believe she disseminated the information to family members, children and to her counsel.

It is alleged, that the defendant Mrs. Chaudhry violated the Wiretap Act by intercepting Mr. Chaudhry’s private conversations using a recording device and disclosing or endeavoring to disclose the contents of those recordings. Per the filed documents, Nevada law prohibits the non-consensual monitoring and recording of conversations, and separately prohibits the later dissemination of those illegally recorded communications. Further Mr. Chaudhry has alleged that as part of divorce-planning, his wife Mrs. Chaudhry began secretly withdrawing large sums of cash, transferring funds to relatives overseas, secretly buying gold and concealing it with the parties’ daughter and pressuring him to pay off the marital residence in full.

Here comes the fascinating Bollywood script. The intriguing part of the lawsuit as per the records is that while the parties were separated, they began spending time together in another property, a townhome, they own where Mr. Chaudhry was temporarily staying during the parties’ separation. One day Mrs. Chaudhry asked Mr. Chaudhry for the code to enter the townhome when he wasn’t there so that she could take a nap. Mr. Chaudhry provided the code to his separated wife. They were still not divorced. Thereafter, Mr. Chaudhry was in the townhome alone when he had private telephone conversations, including a conversation with his best friend about a bachelor party scheduled in Colombia, which he did not tell his separated wife Mrs. Chaudhry. Based on the events that followed Mr. Chaudhry believes his wife placed a recording device at the townhome.

In and around November 2022, Mr. Chaudhry returned to his marital home. It is alleged that around that time Mrs. Chaudhry caused a recording device inserted into Mr. Chaudhry’s Porsche Cayenne and Mercedes CLS550 and secretly intercepted communications with Mr. Chaudhry’s friends and siblings. Mr. Chaudhryalleges that these recordings were made without his participation, consent or knowledge. Around the same time, they both took a trip to Cancun. At the end of the trip, Mrs. Chaudhry confronted her husband about having gone to a bachelor party in Colombia. At that time Mr. Chaudhry asked his wife on how she knew about it, and she said, “Allah talks to me and told me.”  She continued to allege that “Allah” gave her the information and repeatedly stated “what I hear cannot be unheard.”

Mr. Chaudhry in his complaint alleges that his wife in or around February, 2023, went to Pakistan to see her sisters and took $85,000 cash stored in the house, and continued her divorce planning. Further he alleges that his wife continued to confront him about conversations he had in private in his vehicle, claiming that God was informing her and continued secretly taking significant funds from bank accounts and transferring them to third parties.

In March 2023, Mr. Chaudhry searched his vehicle but did not find the recording device and then looked for his wife’s laptop which he found hidden in the drawer and discovered multiple folder with recording files. To his surprise the recordings were his private communications with other individuals. When he confronted his wife about the recordings, she responded “I am not the one who recorded you.”

Mr. Chaudhry claims he has suffered severe emotional distress as a result of his wife’s improper actions. It is alleged that Mrs. Chaudhry took the recordings to her lawyers in an effort to gain leverage and an extortionary advantage in the anticipated custody and divorce case. During the discovery process Mrs. Chaudhry did not respond or deny that she caused a recording device to be placed to record her husband in a vehicle.  On many occasions, Mrs. Chaudhry’s counsel instructed her not to answer certain questions and counsel objected on the basis of relevance.  The Court ruled that it would allow the question, and directly asked Mrs. Chaudhry, “Did you record your husband without his knowledge?”. Mrs. Chaudhry’s counsel made the same objection again, and the Court stated that it already overruled Mrs. Chaudhry’s lawyer’s objection. Per documents, her counsel continued arguing and the Court stated a fifth time that it overruled the objection. The Court asked the same question for the sixth time, “Were there audio recordings…?” Before Mrs. Chaudhry could respond, her counsel instructed her twice, to invoke her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. Mrs. Chaudhrystated, “I take the Fifth.”

Mr. Chaudhry’s lawyer argued that Mrs. Chaudhry’s failure to deny the recording of conversations while her husband was driving a vehicle should be construed as an admission that she did so cause such recordings to be made. Plaintiff, Mr. Chaudhry is asking the court that due to his wife’s improper conduct, he is entitled to statutory and other damages, including but not limited to attorney’s fees and costs. Mr. Chaudhry. is requesting the Court for multiple claims for relief including intentional infliction of emotional distress for harassing and/or extortionary purposes, as well as using such recordings to gain an advantage in the divorce litigation.

Mr. Chaudhry is claiming he has suffered, and continues to suffer, mental pain, anguish, anxiety and unjustifiable emotional trauma and will continue to suffer mental suffering, humiliation, shame, damaged reputation, and depression, as a result of his wife’s invasion of his privacy. Mr. Chaudhry is demanding a jury trial.