High Court of Karnataka Allows Petition for Inclusion of Name in Birth Certificate Under Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969 — Petitioner's Name Omitted from Birth Certificate Despite Being a Citizen of India. The Court directed the respondent to issue a fresh birth certificate with the petitioner's name, holding that omission of name does not disentitle the petitioner to have it included.

High Court: Karnataka High Court Bench: BENGALURU In Favour of Accused
  • 129
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Fathima Richelle Mather, a citizen of India pursuing her Master's in Management at IE University, Madrid, Spain, was born on 28.4.2000 at Bhagwan Mahaveer Jain Hospital, Bangalore. The birth certificate issued at that time contained the names of her father and mother but omitted her name. Subsequently, the petitioner applied to the Registrar of Births and Deaths and Commissioner, Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP), seeking inclusion of her name in the birth certificate. The respondent issued an endorsement dated 28.07.2023 (Annexure-E) refusing the request. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of certiorari to quash the endorsement and a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to issue a birth certificate including her name. The Court, after hearing the parties, observed that the omission of the petitioner's name in the birth certificate was a mistake that could be rectified. The Court held that the respondent's refusal was unjustified and directed the respondent to issue a fresh birth certificate with the petitioner's name within a specified period. The petition was allowed with the above direction.

Headnote

A) Registration of Births and Deaths - Inclusion of Name in Birth Certificate - Section 15, Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969 - The petitioner sought inclusion of her name in the birth certificate which was omitted at the time of registration. The respondent refused on the ground that the name was not mentioned in the original certificate. The Court held that the omission of the name does not disentitle the petitioner to have her name included, and directed the respondent to issue a fresh birth certificate with the petitioner's name. (Paras 1-5)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the respondent authority can refuse to include the name of the petitioner in the birth certificate when the name was omitted at the time of registration.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The writ petition is allowed. The endorsement dated 28.07.2023 is quashed. The respondent is directed to issue a fresh birth certificate with the name of the petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Law Points

  • Right to have name included in birth certificate
  • Registration of Births and Deaths Act
  • 1969
  • Section 15
  • Writ of Mandamus
  • Writ of Certiorari
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2023 LawText (KAR) (09) 58

WP No. 18413 of 2023 (LB-BMP)

2023-09-01

Suraj Govindaraj

Rakesh B Bhatt (for petitioner), Pawan Kumar (for respondent)

Fathima Richelle Mather

The Registrar of Births and Deaths and Commissioner, Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking quashing of endorsement and direction to include name in birth certificate.

Remedy Sought

Petitioner sought a writ of certiorari to quash the endorsement dated 28.07.2023 and a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to issue a birth certificate including her name.

Filing Reason

The respondent refused to include the petitioner's name in the birth certificate, which was omitted at the time of registration.

Previous Decisions

The respondent issued an endorsement dated 28.07.2023 refusing the request for inclusion of name.

Issues

Whether the respondent can refuse to include the name of the petitioner in the birth certificate when the name was omitted at the time of registration.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that the omission of her name was a mistake and she is entitled to have her name included in the birth certificate. Respondent contended that the name was not mentioned in the original certificate and therefore cannot be included.

Ratio Decidendi

The omission of the name of the child in the birth certificate does not disentitle the child to have her name included. The authority is bound to include the name upon application, and refusal is unjustified.

Judgment Excerpts

The petitioner is a citizen of India at present pursuing her Master’s in Management Program at IE University, Madrid, Spain. The name of the petitioner was not mentioned in the said birth certificate. The respondent is directed to issue a fresh birth certificate with the name of the petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Procedural History

The petitioner applied to the respondent for inclusion of her name in the birth certificate. The respondent issued an endorsement dated 28.07.2023 refusing the request. The petitioner then filed the present writ petition on 01.09.2023, which was allowed on the same day.

Acts & Sections

  • Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969: Section 15
  • Constitution of India: Articles 226, 227
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Allows Petition for Inclusion of Name in Birth Certificate Under Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969 — Petitioner's Name Omitted from Birth Certificate Despite Being a Citizen of India. The Court directed the respond...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case Due to Lack of Direct Evidence and Unreliable Circumstantial Evidence. Conviction under Section 302 IPC for Murder of Wife Set Aside as Prosecution Failed to Prove Guilt Beyond Reasonable Doubt.