On 17th December, 2019, the Center told the Supreme Court that the jury system which adjudicates the Parsi Community’s marital disputes, including divorce and child custody, through a jury system, needed to be retained.

This was in response to Naomi Sam Irani’s petition challenging several provisions of the Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act, 1936, whereby the Centre opposed the petitioner’s claim for parity in the legal system between Hindus and Parsis, in matters relating to matrimonial disputes, including divorce. Naomi Irani, through defender Neela Gokhale, had said that the 1936 Act was cumbersome, involving a system similar to the jury’s decision and did not grant access to mediation and settlement available to Hindu women under The family Court system.

The Center’s affidavit said that the 1936 Act was a pre-constitutional legislation and was considered compliant with the customs of the Parsi community. “When the initiatives came from the Bombay Parsi Punchayet Board in 1986, in the form of proposals to amend the Act, the Minorities Commission considered those proposals and recommended them to the government. The amendments were made in 1988 to make certain provisions of the PMD Act similar to the Hindu Marriage Law,” it said.

The Centre has, however, not supported Irani’s plea for divorce proceedings in Family Courts as was available to Hindus. “Parsi community is a special community forming part of Indian societal mosaic and it was felt necessary to protect their values, customs, beliefs and practices in the field of personal law. Parsi community, owing to its scarce numbers, also requires to be protected by way of separate mechanism. A special law (like PMD Act) for that small community, with an intelligibly different or unique structure, is permissible in law,” it said.

Irani had filed a Parsi marriage lawsuit in 2016 before the Bombay High Court seeking dissolution of their 11-year marriage, of which the couple has a 10-year-old son and an 8-year-old daughter. Section 18 of the PMD Act establishes the constitution of special courts in Kolkata, Chennai and Mumbai, where the Chief Justice of the concerned High Court in question would have jurisdiction to appoint a judge who would be assisted by five delegates, who together would decide the alimony, education, maintenance and custody of the children.