In a development that could have far reaching implications for the Parsi community, the Supreme Court of India has begun hearing a petition challenging the continued reliance on a 1908 Bombay High Court ruling that has shaped the understanding of “who is a Parsi” for over a century. The case questions the Dinshaw M. Petit v. Sir Jamsetjee Jejeebhoy judgment, which has been treated as determinative of Parsi identity.

Senior Advocate Percival Billimoria, appearing before a Bench of Justice B V Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, described the ruling as: “blatantly discriminatory” and rooted in racial thinking. He argued that the current distinction in community practice is stark: children of Parsi men married to non-Parsi women are accepted as Parsis, while children of Parsi women married to non-Parsi men are excluded.

He pointed to passages in the 1908 decision that referred to inter racial marriages as diluting lineage, language he said would be impermissible under modern constitutional principles. He maintained that while Zoroastrianism is a religion, the term “Parsi” has historically been treated as an ethnic category, leading to exclusion based on lineage rather than faith.

Filed under Article 32 by a minor child through his Parsi Zoroastrian mother, the petition invokes Articles 14, 15, 19, 21 and 25 of the Constitution. It seeks to strike down the century old ruling as unconstitutional and to end discrimination against Parsi women and their children.

As the matter moves forward, the Court is being asked to examine whether identity in modern India can continue to rest on a colonial era formulation shaped by race and lineage. For a community deeply rooted in faith, tradition and reform, the outcome could influence how belonging is understood for generations to come. The decision now rests at the intersection of history, equality and constitutional values. The matter will next be heard on 7^th April, 2026.