In a landmark judgment, the Himachal Pradesh High Court ruled that children born from unregistered or legally invalid marriages cannot be denied the right to birth registration. Presiding over the case, Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua emphasized that every child’s right to identity and documentation is fundamental and cannot be withheld due to the marital status of their parents. The judgment sets a vital precedent for children’s rights, especially in cases where their parents’ union may not conform to formal legal requirements.
The case (CWP No. 2840 of 2023) involved three minors, represented by their mother, who sought inclusion of their names in the local Panchayat’s Birth and Pariwar Registers after authorities repeatedly denied their registration. Represented by Advocate Divya Raj Singh, the petitioners argued that their right to identity should not be compromised because of their parents’ marital circumstances. Additional Advocates General Dalip K. Sharma and Amandeep Sharma represented the state, contending that registration of the children was barred due to the parents’ marital status under the Special Marriage Act, 1954.
Case Background
The parents of the children were married while the father’s first marriage was still legally valid, rendering the second marriage unregistrable under Section 4(a) of the Special Marriage Act, 1954. This provision prohibits marriage between two persons if either party has a living spouse. The local Panchayat, citing both the Special Marriage Act and Rule 21 of the H.P. Panchayati Raj General Rules, 1997, refused to register the children’s names, asserting that the parents’ marital status disqualified the children from inclusion in official records.
This stance forced the mother to file a writ petition, arguing that the denial violated the children’s rights to identity and birth documentation, which should be independent of any marital technicalities involving their parents.
Legal Issues Involved
1. Validity of Marriage under Special Marriage Act, 1954: The court had to consider whether the registration of children’s names could be denied on the basis of their parents’ marriage being unregistrable under Section 4(a) of the Act. This section invalidates marriages if either party has an existing spouse at the time of the marriage, which was the case for the children’s father.
2. Applicability of the H.P. Panchayati Raj General Rules, 1997: The Panchayat cited Rule 21, which outlines the registration of births, deaths, and marriages but lacks specific provisions preventing the registration of children from such unions.
3. Child’s Right to Identity under Hindu Marriage Act, 1955: Section 16 of the Hindu Marriage Act grants legitimacy to children born from void or voidable marriages, ensuring they are recognized legally. The Court had to decide if this section provided a basis to ensure these children’s identities were recorded in public records, regardless of the marital legality of their parents’ union.
Court’s Observations and Interpretation
Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua dismissed the Panchayat’s reliance on the Special Marriage Act to deny registration of the children. She clarified that Section 4(a) of the Act applies strictly to the validity of the marriage itself, not to the rights of children born from such unions. Citing Section 16 of the Hindu Marriage Act, she emphasized that children from unregistered or void marriages are still considered legitimate for most purposes, thus entitling them to identity documentation.
In a significant observation, Justice Dua stated:
“The petitioners are living beings. The fact that they are there, needs to be acknowledged in law.”
The Court drew attention to the Supreme Court’s judgment in Union of India v. V.R. Tripathi, which highlighted that Section 16 of the Hindu Marriage Act was established to protect children from social and legal discrimination. Justice Dua underlined that this provision was enacted to ensure children are not treated unfairly because of their parents’ marital status. The Court further observed that while Section 16 restricts inheritance rights beyond parental property, it does not impose restrictions on the child’s basic right to identity and registration.
In her judgment, Justice Dua directed the Panchayat to complete the process of registering the children’s names in both the Birth and Pariwar Registers within five weeks.
