Court Criticizes Overly Technical Approach of Family Court, Advocates for Technology as a Tool to Facilitate Justice
In a significant judgment, the Gujarat High Court has streamlined the procedure for recording mutual divorce consent via video conferencing, particularly for cases involving spouses residing abroad. The decision, delivered by Justice J.C. Doshi, underscores the necessity of adopting a litigant-friendly approach and leveraging technology as a facilitator of justice rather than a hindrance.
The case involved petitioners Vaidehi and Gaurav Dinesh Vyas, who sought a mutual divorce under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Due to Gaurav residing in Australia, the couple requested the Family Court to allow video conferencing to record his consent. However, the Family Court imposed 15 elaborate directions, complicating the process unnecessarily. These included appointing a Court Commissioner to verify the affidavit submitted by Gaurav, which the petitioners found burdensome and challenged in the High Court.
Justice Doshi criticized the Family Court's hyper-technical approach, stating that the directions issued smothered the smooth process of recording consent, thereby frustrating the petitioners' valid requests. The High Court emphasized that technology should serve as a handmaiden to justice, ensuring simplicity, reliability, and accessibility for litigants.
Citing precedents such as Santhini v. Vijaya Venkatesh, the judgment highlighted that video conferencing is a permissible mode for recording consent when both parties agree. The court noted that imposing complex technological processes risks delaying justice rather than delivering it.
The High Court set aside the Family Court's orders and directed that Gaurav be allowed to appear through video conferencing using his portable device during family court working hours. The Family Court was instructed to schedule the video conferencing in accordance with Indian Standard Time and to facilitate the process without unnecessary complications.
This judgment is a significant step towards modernizing judicial processes and underscores the judiciary's commitment to ensuring that technology is effectively utilized to enhance access to justice. The decision is expected to set a precedent for similar cases, simplifying procedures for parties seeking mutual divorce across jurisdictions.
Bottom line:-
The Family Court cannot adopt an overly technical approach that complicates the process for recording consent via video conferencing, especially in mutual divorce cases where one spouse resides abroad. The Court must adopt a litigant-friendly approach, ensuring technology serves as a handmaiden to justice.
Statutory provision(s): Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 Section 13B, Family Courts Act, 1984 Sections 14, 15, 16
