The practical difficulties faced by women pursuing matrimonial disputes must weigh heavily when courts decide whether a case should be moved to another jurisdiction, the Gujarat High Court has held, stressing that access to justice must extend beyond what the law guarantees on paper.
In Purvaben vs Hirenbhai Chaganbhai Solanki, Justice D N Ray ruled that the convenience of the weaker party should be the primary consideration in deciding applications seeking the transfer of matrimonial proceedings.
The Court observed that women must not be left struggling with financial and logistical barriers that make pursuing a legal remedy increasingly difficult.
“The only test is to be applied is the convenience of the weaker party,” the Court said, adding that the central question is whether transferring a case would help address the inherent inequality faced by the person seeking justice. Any suppression of facts or misrepresentation by the applicant, however, must also receive due consideration.
Matrimonial litigation must not become a punishment
Highlighting the distinct nature of matrimonial disputes, the Court noted that the burden of litigation can sometimes become more distressing than the original grievance that prompted the parties to approach the judiciary.
“Matrimonial disputes form a special category of disputes where both the parties suffer through the process of litigation sometimes even more than the malady they were seeking to redress by invoking legal remedies available to them,” it observed.
The Court added that the legal process itself can sometimes become a form of punishment for those involved.
The ruling came in response to a wife’s application under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking to transfer a family suit from the Family Court in Amreli to the Family Court in Junagadh, nearly 100 kilometres away.
The woman told the Court that she had no independent source of income and struggled to meet the travel costs and legal expenses associated with attending proceedings in Amreli. Her husband opposed the transfer request.
Constitutional protection for equal access to justice
Referring to Article 15(3) of the Constitution, the High Court emphasised the need for affirmative measures that help women overcome structural disadvantages when accessing legal remedies.
The Court explained that protective discrimination serves a broader purpose: enabling parties who begin from unequal positions to have a genuinely equal opportunity to seek justice.
It stressed that, while considering a transfer application, the Court is not required to examine the competing allegations or determine the merits of the underlying matrimonial dispute. The focus at this stage is whether shifting the proceedings would help balance the practical disadvantages confronting the applicant.
Finding merit in the wife’s concerns, the High Court allowed her application and directed that the family suit be transferred from Amreli to Junagadh.
The decision reinforces the principle that procedural convenience is not merely a technical consideration in matrimonial litigation. Where financial hardship and other practical obstacles threaten to undermine a woman’s ability to pursue her case, courts must consider whether transferring the proceedings can make access to justice more meaningful.