The Kerala High Court recently ruled that the name of the father in a child’s birth certificate—when the child is born during a valid marriage—cannot be changed unilaterally by a Registrar of Births and Deaths. The Court emphasized that such a change requires a DNA test report, an attested agreement, and most importantly, an order from a competent court.
Justice C.S. Dias delivered this judgment in the case titled AA v. State of Kerala and Ors (WP(C) 26123/2024), holding that the substitution of the petitioner’s name with that of another man as the child’s father, without judicial backing and without notice to the lawful father, was illegal.
Background of the Case
The petitioner was married to the seventh respondent on May 26, 2010. A child was born on March 7, 2011, during the course of their marriage. Initially, the petitioner’s name was correctly recorded as the father in the child’s birth records.
Soon after childbirth, the seventh respondent returned to her parental home with the child for postnatal recovery. However, on April 12, 2011, both mother and child went missing. The petitioner approached the Kerala High Court through a habeas corpus petition. During proceedings, the woman admitted she wanted to live with another man, the eighth respondent. Their marriage subsequently ended in mutual consent.
Later, the petitioner discovered through an RTI reply that his name had been replaced with the eighth respondent’s as the father in the birth certificate, based on a joint application submitted by the seventh and eighth respondents. The municipality issued a revised certificate without giving the petitioner an opportunity to be heard.
Read also:- Mental Health is Right to Life: Supreme Court Issues Student Welfare Guidelines
Quoting Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, the Court highlighted:
“A child born during the subsistence of a valid marriage, or within 280 days after its dissolution, is conclusively presumed to be the legitimate child of the husband unless proven otherwise.”
The Court noted that there was no legal evidence or judicial declaration to counter this presumption. Despite this, the Registrar had altered the birth certificate based solely on documents submitted by the mother and her partner—without adhering to the prescribed legal process.
Read also:- BNSS Mandates Prior Notice to Accused Before Cognizance: Delhi High Court Reinforces New Safeguard
The High Court found that the substitution of the petitioner’s name was:
- Arbitrary,
- Violative of natural justice, and
- Legally unsustainable.
As a result, the Court quashed the revised birth report and birth certificate. It directed the Registrar to reconsider the application filed by the mother and her partner only after giving the petitioner a chance to be heard and following all legal procedures.
“Given the sensitivity of the issue, the Registry shall anonymize the identities of the parties involved,” the Court concluded.
Case Title - AA v State of Kerala and Ors
Case No - WP(C) 26123/ 2024
Counsel for Petitioner - Reshma E. Anna Sonie, Atheena Antony, Anjitha Santhosh, Athira V M
Counsel for Respondent - Vidya Kuriakose (Sr. GP), M Sasindran,