Issues with Family Courts functioning

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 lack of continuity. For example, in the family courts at Tamil Nadu, 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.

♤ 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.

♤ Further, 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.

♤ 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.

♤ Further, the substantive aspect of the law cannot be ignored because it is what cases are made of. A practical example of a problem with the substantive law is that many times, the husband in a divorce cases resorts to reconciliation mainly because he wants to escape the responsibility of giving maintenance to his wife.

It is evident that the setting up of these family courts was a dynamic step so far as reducing the backlog and disposing off cases while ensuring that there is an effective delivery of justice goes. However, as aforementioned, there are still matters of concern which plague these courts.