Family Court's Failure to Provide Legal Assistance Violates Fundamental Rights Under Article 21 of the Constitution
In a significant ruling, the Chhattisgarh High Court has overturned an ex parte divorce decree issued by the Family Court in Janjgir-Champa, citing a breach of the appellant's fundamental rights. The case, Anchal Agrawal v. Arvind Agrawal, revolved around the Family Court's decision to proceed ex parte against the appellant, Anchal Agrawal, without adequate legal representation.
The High Court bench, comprising Justices Sanjay K. Agrawal and Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal, emphasized that the Family Court acted without jurisdiction by proceeding ex parte on a date meant for interlocutory matters rather than for hearing the suit. The judges underscored that the Family Court must ensure legal aid is provided to financially challenged litigants, as mandated by the National Legal Services Authority (Free and Competent Legal Services) Regulations, 2010.
The case history reveals that Anchal Agrawal, due to financial constraints, was unable to engage a legal counsel. Despite her oral request for legal aid, the Family Court advised her to approach the District Legal Services Authority but failed to appoint an amicus curiae or provide legal assistance, which the High Court found to be a violation of her constitutional rights under Article 21.
The High Court's judgment reiterates the importance of procedural fairness in family law cases, especially in ensuring access to justice for indigent parties. The court directed the Family Court to resume proceedings from the stage prior to the ex parte order and mandated the District Legal Services Authority to provide legal aid to the appellant.
The ruling also highlighted systemic issues in the functioning of Family Courts, directing them to maintain a panel of legal experts for appointing amicus curiae, as per the Chhattisgarh Family Courts Rules, 2007. This directive aims to facilitate effective legal representation for parties unable to afford legal services due to financial constraints.
Legal experts have lauded the High Court's decision for reinforcing the principle that access to justice should not be impeded by economic barriers, ensuring that family disputes are resolved with fairness and equity.
Bottom Line:
Family Court cannot proceed ex parte or pass an ex parte decree on a date fixed for interlocutory matters and not for hearing of the suit. Failure to provide legal aid to an indigent party violates their fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
Statutory provision(s): Family Courts Act, 1984 Sections 10, 13, 19; Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 Section 13; Constitution Of India Article 21; Chhattisgarh Family Courts Rules, 2007 Rule 14; National Legal Services Authority (Free and Competent Legal Services) Regulations, 2010 Regulation 3; Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 Section 20.
Anchal Agrawal v. Arvind Agrawal, (Chhattisgarh)(DB) : Law Finder Doc id # 2833673
