The Surat-based man who has gone to court to stop his seven-year-old daughter taking diksha is taking heart from a similar petition by a fellow Jain father in May this year. In that case, also of Surat, the court had stayed a 12-year-old from taking renunciation, till the father’s petition for custody was heard.
The same Surat Family Court led by Judge S V Mansuri which gave the May stay is hearing the petition regarding the seven-year-old. It will be next heard on December 22.
The case has again stirred the debate around minor Jain children taking diksha. Community leader Bipesh Shah, a textile trader from Surat, who has long opposed this, says: “The government has banned child marriage. A similar ban should be imposed on minors taking diksha. I have been writing in various WhatsApp groups of the Jain community on this.”
However, Shah says he has found few takers, including among Jain religious leaders. “Around 70% oppose the move, and send hateful and abusive messages. I have also requested our religious priests to address this issue.”
Explaining his opposition, Shah says: “Childhood is a beautiful period, and time to play, study and enjoy. Once initiated into the diksha ceremony, one has to cut off all worldly comforts and relationships.”
There are other ways to serve the community than following the religious path, Shah says. “As religious leaders, they can benefit the community, but by becoming doctors, engineers, lawyers, bureaucrats, and other leaders in their fields too, they can serve the people. At a tender age, they cannot make decisions for their future.”
Elaborating on the stringent requirements of diksha, another Jain community leader of Surat, on the condition of anonymity, says: “Prior to diksha, there is a ‘mehendi ceremony’, in which the person taking renunciation takes blessings from the religious priest under whom he or she will serve as a monk. Mehendi is then put on their hands, and their head shaved. The second ceremony involves them seeking blessings of their parents and relatives… the last time they will meet them as family members. Once they attain monkhood, they give up their original name and are given a new name by their priest. Then, on the day they take monkhood, a person participates in the Varsidan ceremony, where they give away money, jewellery….”
The 42-year-old father who has gone to court to stop his son from becoming a monk says he and his wife have been estranged for over a year. A share trader, he got married in June 2012, and the couple had two children. In April 2024, following frequent disagreements, the wife moved to her mother’s house with their daughter, who is 7, and son, 5.
While the mother has not spoken to the media, with a relative telling The Indian Express that she would put forth her stand at the December 22 hearing, the father says he got to know a few days ago that his daughter had spent the past couple of months at a Jain temple in Mumbai, and that the seven-year-old would take monkhood on February 8, 2026.
In his application to the Surat Family Court seeking a stay, the father has said, “At this tender age of 7 years, my daughter cannot make a decision about her future. As a legal guardian, my consent for such an important decision was not taken, which was my wife’s sole decision.” He also claims that his wife earlier left their daughter at a Jain temple in Ahmedabad without his consent, and he had brought her back from there. On hearing about her staying at a temple in Mumbai, he says, he went there too but was turned away.
“I have also applied for legal custody of both children, which is pending,” the father told the court. In his custody petition, the father said: “My wife is not working and can’t take care of their education. She is dependent on her elder brother and her father.” He said he could provide the two a good education and “secure their future”.
Speaking to The Indian Express, he said: “I love my daughter a lot, and I will do whatever I can to give her a better future. Diksha at such a young age is inappropriate. I am hopeful the court will intervene, just like it did in May 2025.”
The May order came just days before the diksha ceremony of the 12-year-old. In its May 20 order, Judge Mansuri said the ceremony should be held off till the father’s petition for custody was heard. It added: “The applicant’s son is a minor and not competent to decide about his future. Consent given by the minor for the diksha ceremony should not be taken into consideration… The minor is not capable of making decisions for his future till he attains the age of 18.”
The applicant was the 12-year-old’s father, a businessman from Indore in Madhya Pradesh. His mother lives in Surat.
The couple married in 2008 and had the son in 2013. But they could not get along, and in 2016, the wife returned to Surat. In 2018, she filed a complaint at the Adajan Police Station in Surat against her husband and his parents, accusing them of demanding dowry. She also filed a domestic violence case against her husband, and filed an application in the Surat Family Court seeking maintenance from her husband for herself and the son.
The husband and his parents later obtained anticipatory bail in the cases against them.
In 2023, the man applied for the custody of his son under the Guardians and Wards Act. The decision is pending. In April this year, he also filed an application with the family court for interim custody of his son, but that too is pending.
Advocate Naresh Gohil, who represented the man, says, “If the mother has such deep faith in diksha, she should take it in place of her son. By forcing the 12-year-old, she wanted to end my client’s legacy.”
The defence argued that attaining monkhood was a “path to heaven”, and that stopping it would have “deep consequences within the Jain community”. They also said that while as per law, one reaches adulthood at the age of 18, among Jains, once a boy reaches 7 years of age, he is considered an adult.
Gohil says they argued that “no religion is above the law”, and that the father’s consent should be taken for diksha of his son or daughter. “If not, it violates his fundamental rights.”