The Last Jury Standing: India's Unique Parsi Matrimonial Court System

Although Jury Trials in India are long gone, however, till today, a lesser-known jury trial (delegates system) still exists in India, administered by the Parsi community. The Parsi community in India maintains a unique legal distinction in matrimonial proceedings by continuing to employ a jury system for resolving marital disputes under the Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act of 1936.

Legal Framework of Parsi Matrimonial Courts

The Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act, 1936 (PMDA) provides for the establishment of special courts to hear matrimonial disputes within the community. Section 18 of the Act establishes two types of matrimonial courts:

• Parsi Chief Matrimonial Courts: Established in the presidency towns of Calcutta, Madras, and Bombay
• Parsi District Matrimonial Courts: Established in other places as designated by respective State governments

The Parsi Chief Matrimonial Courts are presided over by the Chief Justice of the respective High Court or another judge of the same court appointed by the Chief Justice. The District Matrimonial Courts are presided over by the principal court of original civil jurisdiction in that district.

The Delegate System (Jury)

The most distinctive feature of these courts is the requirement under Sections 19 and 20 of the Act for the presiding judge to be aided by five delegates (jury members) in the trial of cases. These delegates are appointed from the Parsi community and serve for a period of ten years. Under Section 46 of the Act, the decision on factual matters is determined by the majority opinion of the delegates, and only when they are equally divided does the presiding judge make the decisive determination.

Appointment of Delegates

According to Section 24 of the Act, the State Government has the sole authority to appoint delegates. Only members of the Parsi community can be appointed as delegates, and their names must be published in the Official Gazette.

Judicial Pronouncement

It is pertinent to mention that the role of delegates is now excluded in certain proceedings, particularly in non-contentious matters. The Bombay High Court in Minoo Rustomji Shroff v. Union of India, Writ Petition No. 348 of 2005, ruled that the delegates' assistance is not required in divorce proceedings by mutual consent under Section 32-B of the Act. The court held that in such cases, no "adjudication" as such is involved, and therefore, the delegates' role is not necessary. In Sohrab Anklesaria v. Feroza Anklesaria PARSI SUIT NO. 14 OF 2011, Bombay High Court, demonstrated the practical application of Section 46, where the decision of the majority of delegates (3:1 in this case) was accepted as determinative of the factual issues in a contested divorce case. The Parsi System of adjudicating matrimonial disputes has been brought to challenge in the Supreme Court in the matter of Naomi Sam Irani vs. Union of India, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1125/2017, where the matrimonial proceedings are underway before the Parsi District Matrimonial Court, Surat. The petitioner has challenged the jury system, calling it unfair based on Parsi norms, morality, and ethics rather than principles of natural justice.

The Parsi jury system in matrimonial matters is the last vestige of a jury trial system in India, which was otherwise abandoned decades ago. While it serves as a testament to the Parsis' efforts to maintain community involvement in personal law matters, it faces significant challenges in its operation and disposal of cases. Be that as it may, the Parsi jury system in matrimonial matters remains a fascinating intersection of societal practices, community tradition, and modern legal principles in India's pluralistic constitutional landscape.

The author is an Assistant Public Prosecutor in CBI and views are personal.