Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
A petition has been filed by Ms. Naomi Sam Irani in Supreme Court which challenged the validity of some vital sections under theand Divorce Act 1936. A Bench comprising of Jst. Kurian Joseph and Jst. Deepak Gupta have asked for response from the government. Petitioner has challenged sec.18,19,20, 21, 24,30,32(a),46, 47(b) and 50 of the Act. These provisions provide for the procedure for constituting jury system. It was also contended that jury system was abolished long with the famous case of KM Nanwati.
Section 19 lays down that CJ of High Court is to appoint five senior members (can be called as jury) of the community which will decide on the factual aspect of the dispute and the presiding judge will accordingly decide on the legal issue. Section 18 establishes special courts for resolution of Parsi matrimonial disputes. This establishment of alternative mechanism precludes them the benefits granted by Family courts.
Adding to this petitioner also mentioned that the impugned provisions reflects arbitrariness and hampers the speedy delivery of justice. Article 21 of the Constitution enshrines fair trail to everyone irrespective, but provisions of PMDA, 1936 does not entitle fair trial to persons governed under it.
Another major argument by petitioner which highlights the unconstitutionality of the impugned provisions is that there is no equal treatment being given as provided under Art. 14 of the Constitution. The treatment given to other persons in similar situation under different personal laws is better than that under PMDA.
The court has asked for response from the government.
86540
103860
630
114
59824