Divorce pains

"A fundamental right to life and liberty, which includes the right to speedy justice, is being denied to a particular community," according to Naomi Sam Irani. She has moved the Supreme Court, questioning the validity of provisions of the Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act (PMDA) of 1936. A bench of Justices Kurian Joseph and Amitava Roy has agreed to examine the issue and sought the central government’s response. Irani’s petition seeks the doing away of the jury system to decide on Parsi divorces and prays for a procedure similar to family courts "which attempts to provide speedy settlement through reconciliation," according to a report dated November 17, 2017 in The Times of India. Irani alleges that the current provisions of the Act made "estranged couples go through a torturous exercise to get divorced."

Irani had moved a matrimonial suit last year before the Bombay High Court seeking the dissolution of her 11-year-old marriage, but "there has been no appointment of delegates (jury members) as contemplated under the PMDA," she told the newspaper. Under the PMDA, special courts are constituted in Bombay, Calcutta and Madras, where the Chief Justices of these High Courts can appoint a judge aided by five delegates who can decide on alimony, maintenance and custody issues for Parsi couples seeking divorce. Irani’s petition points out that these provisions inconvenience those who do not live in these cities and go against the Supreme Court’s stance that matrimonial disputes need to be filed in the family court nearest to the woman’s residence.

The subject of relegating Parsi divorces to the family courts had been taken up in the past by the Federation of the Parsi Zoroastrian Anjumans of India but they were advised that it was preferable to have a High Court judge decide on divorces.