Mumbai: Neither parent can exercise any exclusive right over a child’s birth record, the Aurangabad bench of the Bombay High Court has ruled, while dismissing a woman’s plea to have her name recorded as the sole parent on her child’s birth certificate.
A bench of Justices Mangesh Patil and YG Khobragade also imposed a fine of Rs 5,000, terming the petition an “abuse of process” and a “waste of precious time.”
The petitioner woman had sought direction to the municipal authorities to record her as a “single parent” in the child’s birth records. She argued that the father had never seen the child and was addicted to vices, justifying her request.
However, the court strongly criticised her approach, stating that such disputes stem from “ego battles” in matrimonial conflicts, often leading to multiple litigations, including divorce, domestic violence, maintenance, and child custody cases.
“It is quite evident that the petitioner, in order to satisfy her ego, is not bothered about the interest of the child. The child has not even been made a party to this petition,” the court observed.
“The relief being claimed, clearly demonstrates that she can go to the extent of treating her child as if it is a property in respect of which she can claim some rights, ignoring the interest and welfare of the child,” the court said.
The court emphasised that in all such matters, the child’s welfare has to be of paramount consideration. “The very request of the petitioner for recording her name as a single parent in the birth record, undermines the child’s interest,” the court added.
The judges wondered how a mother, for whatever reason, could wish to mask paternity, considering there is no dispute that her estranged husband is the father of the child.
“Only because she alleges that he has never seen the face of the child and is addicted to vices that she claims it gives right to her to be recorded in the birth record as a single parent,” the judges underlined. .
Referring to previous cases before the Supreme Court and Bombay High Court, the judges highlighted that even unwed mothers were required to disclose the father’s identity in a sealed envelope to protect the child’s rights.
The court concluded that the petitioner, despite being the biological mother, could not insist on altering the birth records unilaterally. Dismissing the petition, it directed her to deposit Rs5,000 within two weeks, failing which the amount would be recovered as arrears of land revenue.
