Latest Judgement

ABSTRACT
In a recent judgment, the Delhi High Court rejected a woman’s claim that her marriage had been dissolved through a panchayati divorce allegedly recognized in the Jat community. The Court held that any custom that departs from statutory matrimonial law must be strictly proved through clear and reliable evidence. This decision reaffirms the principle that personal and customary laws cannot be casually invoked to bypass formal legal requirements. This article analyzes the judgment, the legal standards for proving custom, and its significance for family law in India.

1. INTRODUCTION
   Indian family law recognizes statutory forms of marriage and divorce, but it also allows limited space for customs that have the force of law. However, courts have consistently held that customs cannot be presumed and must be strictly established.
   The Delhi High Court, in a recent decision, examined a claim of divorce through a panchayati (community council) process within the Jat community. By rejecting the claim, the Court emphasized that customs affecting marital status must meet strict legal standards of proof.
2. FACTS OF THE CASE
   The woman claimed that her marriage had already been dissolved through a panchayati divorce, which she argued was a valid and recognized custom in the Jat community. On this basis, she denied the existence of a subsisting marriage.
   The opposing party challenged this claim, arguing that no legally valid divorce had taken place and that the alleged custom was neither clearly pleaded nor properly proved.
   The matter reached the Delhi High Court, which was required to decide whether such a customary divorce could be legally recognized.
3. LEGAL ISSUE
   The key issue before the Court was:
   Can a claim of divorce based on a community or panchayati custom be accepted without strict proof of the existence and validity of such a custom?
4. LAW ON CUSTOMARY PRACTICES
   Indian courts recognize customs only when they meet well-established legal requirements. A valid custom must be:
   1. Ancient
   2. Continuous
   3. Certain
   4. Reasonable
   5. Not opposed to public policy
      Most importantly, the burden of proving the custom lies on the person who relies on it. A custom cannot override statutory law unless it is clearly established and legally recognized.
5. DECISION AND REASONING OF THE COURT
   The Delhi High Court rejected the woman’s claim of panchayati divorce. The Court held that:
   1. Mere assertion of a community practice is not sufficient
   2. No reliable evidence was produced to prove the existence of such a custom
   3. There was no proof that the alleged custom was uniformly followed or legally accepted
   4. Statutory matrimonial law cannot be displaced by unproven customs
      The Court reiterated that marriage and divorce directly affect legal status and rights, and therefore cannot be determined through informal or loosely claimed practices.
6. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE JUDGMENT
   This judgment is important for several reasons:
   1. Reinforcement of Rule of Law
      It ensures that personal status issues like divorce are governed by law, not unverified social practices.
   2. Protection Against Arbitrary Claims
      The ruling prevents misuse of alleged customs to deny legal rights, especially in matrimonial disputes.
   3. Clarity on Customary Law
      It clearly restates that customs must be strictly proved before they can be legally recognized.
7. BROADER IMPLICATIONS FOR FAMILY LAW
   The decision reflects a careful balance between respecting community practices and upholding legal certainty. While Indian law allows recognition of genuine customs, courts remain cautious where such customs affect fundamental rights and legal status.
   The judgment also indirectly protects vulnerable parties by ensuring that divorce cannot be claimed without due process and reliable evidence.
8. CONCLUSION
   The Delhi High Court’s decision rejecting the claim of panchayati divorce in the Jat community underscores an essential principle of Indian law: custom cannot replace statute unless it is clearly and strictly proved.
   By insisting on strong evidence, the Court upheld legal certainty, fairness, and the rule of law in matrimonial matters. The judgment serves as an important reminder that informal community practices cannot be used to bypass statutory protections and procedures.
   This article has been researched and written by Advocate Aarun Chanda, who practices divorce law in Mumbai and Pune. It is intended solely for academic purposes and should not be construed as legal advice. Readers are encouraged to consult a qualified lawyer or advocate specializing in divorce cases for professional legal guidance.

   Seeking expert legal guidance?- Contact The Divorce Law Firm today.