Can you trust the Judge who already heard your Secrets?: HC confronts Family Court's Dual Role problem head-on

In a significant procedural challenge concerning judicial neutrality in family disputes, the Delhi High Court stepped in to examine concerns over Family Court judges assuming dual roles of mediator and adjudicator in the same matter. The petition raised serious questions about whether in-chamber, off-record settlement efforts by presiding judges could compromise fairness, prompting the Court to scrutinize the institutional framework governing such practices, while signalling that the issue warranted deeper administrative consideration.

The controversy began when a public interest litigation flagged that judges in Family Courts were themselves conducting informal, private mediation sessions with litigants and, upon failure of settlement, proceeding to decide the very same disputes on merits. Counsel for the petitioner argued that this practice blurred the legally mandated line between mediation and adjudication, potentially creating a reasonable apprehension of bias.

It was contended that while amicable settlement is encouraged under family law frameworks, the method adopted undermines confidentiality protections and shakes litigants’ faith in an impartial adjudicatory process. The plea sought a clear directive restraining judges from engaging in such dual roles in matters pending before them.

The Division Bench led by Chief Justice D.K. Upadhyaya, however, refrained from issuing judicial directions on the issue at this stage, instead steering the matter toward an institutional mechanism. Emphasizing the nature of the concerns raised, the Court observed, “Having regard to the nature of issue raised in the Public Interest Litigation Petition, we find it appropriate if the Petitioner raises such issues before the Committee of the Hon'ble Judges of this Court dealing with the Family Court matters by way of making a representation.” The Bench further directed that the Committee consider the petitioner’s suggestions expeditiously.

Consequently, the petition was disposed of with liberty to approach the appropriate judicial committee.

Case Title: Preeti Singh Vs. The Principal Judge

Case No.: W.P.(C) 3058/2026

Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Tejas Karia

Advocate for the Petitioner: Adv. Sunklan Porwal

Advocate for the Respondent: None

Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com