Father's Name In Birth Certificate Can't Be Changed Without Court Order, DNA Test Report : Kerala High Court

Justice C S Dias delivered the judgement where the petitioner challenged a revised birth certificate issued by Payyanur Municipality, without following the procedure established by law.

Background

The petitioner was married to the seventh respondent on 26.05.2010. A child was born out of their marriage on 07.03.2011. After the birth of the child the seventh respondent went to her parental home for recuperation with child. But on 12.04.2011, both went missing. The petitioner filed a writ petition, seeking a writ of habeas corpus. The seventh respondent appeared before the Court and stated that she desired to live with her lover, the eighth respondent. In view of the irretrievable breakdown of the marriage, the couple executed an agreement to live separately and subsequently their marriage was dissolved on mutual consent. Later, the petitioner received information under the Right to Information Act, 2005, that the petitioner's name was substituted with that of the eighth respondent as the father of the child. The petitioner challenged this revised birth certificate issued by Payyanur Municipality in which his name as the father was replaced by the eighth respondent, allegedly the biological father of the child. The child was born during the subsistence of the petitioner's marriage, and his name was originally recorded as the father in the birth register. The petitioner submitted that the changes were affected without notice or hearing the petitioner.

Referring section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 which deals with birth during marriage, conclusive proof of legitimacy, the Court noted that “a child born during the subsistence of a valid marriage or within two hundred and eighty days after the dissolution of the marriage is the legitimate offspring of the husband, unless it is proved that the spouses had no access to each other during coverture.”

“In the absence of any admission by the parties to the marriage or a declaration by a court of competent jurisdiction, the petitioner is deemed, conclusively, to be the legitimate father of the child.” the Court added.

The court referred to Section 15 of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969, and Rule 11 of the Kerala Registration of Births and Deaths Rule, 199, which lays down the procedure to correct or cancel an entry in the Register of Births and Deaths. The Court noted that the power conferred on a Registrar under Section 15 and Rule 11 are circumscribed and limited to the correction of clerical or formal errors or entries fraudulently or improperly made, and not matters of disputed paternity, which require a full fledged trial and adjudication, and a judicial imprimatur.

The Court noted that the registrar has substituted the names solely on a joint application and certain documents submitted by the respondents 7 and 8 without comprehending the conclusive proof of section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act.

The Court held that if the father's name has to be changed in the birth records, a DNA test report, an agreement attested before a Notary Public and an order from a competent Court are to be produced according to the circular issued by the Local Self Government Department.

The Court quashed the impugned substituted birth report and certificate and directed the Registrar to reconsider the application submitted by the respondent strictly in accordance with law and affording the petitioner an opportunity to be heard.

Case Title - AA v State of Kerala and Ors

Citation - 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 455

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,