In a landmark ruling, the Delhi High Court affirmed that the right to have one’s identity linked to a biological parent is a fundamental right. On September 23, 2024, Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma delivered a significant judgment in the case W.P.(C) 9430/2023: Shweta v. Central Board of Secondary Education & Anr., allowing a woman to replace her stepmother’s name with her biological mother’s in her CBSE records.
The petitioner, Shweta, had been seeking to correct her Class 10th certificate issued by the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE), which listed her stepmother, Kamlesh, as her mother. The court recognized Shweta’s emotional journey and her fight for the right to have her identity connected to her biological mother, Santosh Kumari, terming it not just a matter of legal correction but a fundamental right under the Constitution of India.
Background of the Case
The case has its roots in Shweta’s early childhood. Born on September 17, 1991, to Dharampal Sangwan and Santosh Kumari in Sonipat, Shweta’s family life was disrupted when her parents separated, leading to her father taking custody of her. Following the divorce of her parents in 2001, her father remarried Kamlesh, and Shweta’s school records were altered to reflect Kamlesh as her mother.
Despite reuniting with her biological mother in 2008 and consistently striving to correct her school records, Shweta’s attempts were ignored by the authorities. The CBSE and her school failed to amend the certificate, which continued to list her stepmother instead of her biological mother. This inconsistency created significant emotional distress for Shweta, who wanted her official documents to reflect her true parentage.
Legal Issues Involved
The case revolved around Shweta’s fundamental right to have her identity correctly reflected in official documents. The petitioner argued that it was her right, guaranteed under Articles 14 and 21 of the Indian Constitution, to have her correct name and parentage in official records, as it directly impacts her dignity, personal identity, and future endeavors.
The CBSE, however, argued that the correction was time-barred and that Shweta’s delay in approaching the Board for changes, over a decade after completing her Class 10th, made her petition unsustainable. Moreover, the Board contended that the name change from Kamlesh to Santosh constituted a “change of mother,” which, according to them, was impermissible under CBSE’s by-laws.
Court’s Observations
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, while delivering the judgment, emphasized that courts must go beyond rigid legal interpretations, especially when a person’s identity and dignity are at stake. The Court highlighted that the petitioner’s biological mother had been an integral part of her life since their reunion, and it was unjust to force her to be identified with her stepmother’s name in official records.
In a critical observation, the Court stated:
“To deny this right to her as a daughter would lead to denying her right to be known by the name of her biological mother… The emotional trauma or distress even an adult may face may be equivalent to a trauma experienced as if one is still a child, as in the present case.”
The Court ruled that Shweta’s request for the correction of her biological mother’s name in her CBSE records was valid and aligned with her constitutional rights. The Court further noted that the CBSE’s stance of equating the correction of parental names with a “change of mother” was an overly rigid and unreasonable interpretation of the law.
The Court asserted that laws must not only serve technical legalities but also respond to the unique personal struggles of individuals. In a crucial passage, Justice Sharma remarked:
“This Court, while adjudicating the present petition, notes that every case cannot be decided solely on the rigid construction of law, without considering the underlying facts… The true essence of fairness often lies in examining the specific circumstances of each case.”
The judgment also invoked the constitutional provision under Article 226, highlighting the Court’s power to issue writs in cases where administrative failures lead to a denial of justice. The Court emphasized its duty to ensure that the petitioner is not left remedy-less, particularly in matters of personal identity.
The Decision
In light of the evidence presented and the emotional weight of the case, the Court ruled in favor of the petitioner. The Delhi High Court directed the CBSE to make the necessary corrections in Shweta’s Class 10th certificate within one month. Specifically, the Court ordered:
– The correction of Shweta’s name from “Shweta Sangwan” to simply “Shweta.”
– The replacement of Kamlesh’s name with Santosh Kumari as Shweta’s mother in the official records.
However, the Court denied Shweta’s request to alter her father’s name from “Dharampal Sangwan” to “Dharampal,” citing no justifiable reason for that correction. The Court maintained that her father’s full name was correctly recorded.
