Challenges and bottlenecks before Family Courts

Challenges before Family Courts :

 

1. As per the report of Times of India nearly 40% of the marriages performed in last 4 years are ending up in divorce. As per census 2011 U.P is fourth state where divorce cases are rising with nearly 1,00,000 cases every year. It behind with only Maharashtra, Gujrat and west Bengal. Whereas it was 0.50 person per thousand in 1990 , it is now more then 5 per thousand in 2018. Comparing to the rising number of divorce cases the number of family courts established are very few. A family court has more then 200 cases listed everyday. If the Presiding officer give even 5 minutes to each case then it require 16.66 hours of working. The result is that P.O. is under great pressure of work. P.O. is forced to post cases on longer dates despite the fact that justice delayed is justice denied.
2. Due to the fact the Family courts have huge pendency of cases and the relative burden on P.O. make it very unattractive posting to him/her. Most of the judges consider it as a punishment posting and refrains from performing . They gets busy in getting a better posting instead . We need to reverse this situation by opening more courts and providing better facilities and perks to the judges.
3. All of us are humans and matrimonial disputes are toughest to handle. We all are grossly involved with our spouses in daily life. The disputes in family court affects judges emotionally then any civil or criminal dispute.
4. There are issues like alimony which become the topic of great controversy and cause harassment to families. What further becomes a problem is that personal issues get intertwined with the legal issues and lead to the unnecessary prolonging of the disposal of these cases. The younger generation, being made a scapegoat in the changing times due to the ensuing cultural war between Conservatives and Liberals, wastes its useful youth in the precincts of the litigating corridors of the family courts, criminal courts and magistrate courts waiting in long queues being expectant of receiving justice.
5. It was laid down in the Family Courts Act that the majority of judges should be women. However, this provision has not been complied with. In the course of the workshop organised in March 2002 by the National Commission for Women, it was noted that there were only 18 women judges till then in the Family Courts in India out of 84 judges in all the 84 courts that existed at that time.
6. Government is empowered to make rules prescribing some more qualifications. Apart from prescribing the qualification of the Judges of Family Courts, the Central Government has no role to play in the administration of this Act. Different High Courts have laid down different rules of the procedure. However, this lack of uniformity could also be one of the reasons behind the fact that family disputes are still being heard by civil courts. Family courts also need to align themselves with women’s organizations and NGOs dealing with the welfare of families, women and children.
7. The question is whether a lawyer’s participation will be useful or detrimental to the performance of a family court. That is the crucial issue. It was suggested at the workshop that the Women’s Commission should consider whether an amendment could be proposed to allow participation of lawyers subject to a proviso giving power to the court to terminate his vakalatnama if he uses delaying tactics by unnecessary adjournments. If such control is given to the court the lawyers will not be able to get adjournments.
8. The lack of uniformity regarding the rules laid down by different states also leads to confusion in its application. Merely passing a central legislation is not in itself a complete step; for implementation in its spirit, it is to be ensured that some level of uniformity is maintained, at least in the initial stages of its coming into effect. Further, the need to amend certain laws is also to be examined and implemented effectively in order to ensure that these courts do not face any hindrance in their working. These small steps, if examined and implemented within time, will go a long way to ensure that the Family Courts are successful, to a greater degree, to fulfil the noble purpose for which they were created.

 

Bottlenecks of family court

 

1. The family court was established with the sole purpose of alienating it from the clumsy atmosphere of Civil and criminal courts, so that the litigants , may settle their matrimonial disputes in a cool and comfortable atmosphere. However, in almost every district the family courts are functioning in the same building where the district Civil and Criminal courts are functioning. Hence, the litigants are facing the same atmosphere and gets hasitent in coming to the family courts and put their problem in a free and comfortable zone.
2. The family courts are not provided with enough funds to operate. Before discussing this issue we must understand that the family courts were established for a special purpose and the litigants are not habitual offenders or habitual litigants. They includes men, women and kids from our society . A special seating arrangement along with facility of basic needs such as chairs, fans, drinking water, a special room for feeding, proper and clean toilets are required. Untill and unless these basic facilities are provided the proper functioning of family courts is a fallacy.
3. Family court is established for the purpose of saving the families and not for breaking the families. The reconciliation process is an integral part of the court procedure.These counmcellors must include, a pshychologist, who can ensure that the disputes are handled by experts who do not forget that while there may be core legal issues to be dealt with; there is also a human and psychological dimension to be dealt with in these matters. The role of the counsellors is not limited to counselling but extends to reconciliation and mutual settlement wherever deemed feasible. However, in our system the counsellors are not appointed looking at their actual qualification and ability to resolve matrimonial disputes and the presence of councellors are at present is just notional.
4. The Family Courts’ main purpose is to assist the smooth and effective disposal of cases relating to family matters. However, like any other system there are certain issues which become a matter of concern when it comes to the working of these courts. One such issue is that of continuity. For example, in the family courts the counsellors are changed every three months. Thus, when cases stretch for a period of time which is longer than this, the woman or the aggrieved person has to adjust with new counsellors and their story has to be retold several times.
5. Since the Family Court has restrictive jurisdiction and does not have the power to decide issues of contempt, people do not seem to take the court as seriously as they would a magistrate or a city civil court.