The Delhi High Court recently ruled that an adult's wish to have their biological mother's name reflected in official records is not just a procedural formality, but rather a fundamental aspect of personal choice, identity, and dignity.

The bench of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma held, “The petitioner, an adult daughter, has expressed her desire to have her biological mother’s name reflected in her official records. This is not merely a legal formality but a matter of personal choice, identity and dignity”.

The court further emphasized that “Members of the community often approach the Courts seeking relief based on unique and sometimes deeply personal struggles, and these facts cannot be overlooked in the name of rigid legal formalism”. 

Shweta, the petitioner, was born in 1991 in Sonipat to Dharampal Sangwan and Santosh Kumari, whose marriage ended in separation during her infancy. Her father gained custody and raised her, enrolling her in school in 2000, where her mother’s name was recorded. Following their official divorce in 2001, her father remarried Kamlesh, after which Shweta alleged mistreatment from both her father and stepmother.

By 2008, Shweta had completed her 10th grade, with her name listed as ‘Shweta Sangwan’ and her parents noted as Dharampal Sangwan and Kamlesh. After reconnecting with her biological mother, she left her father's home due to alleged mistreatment. Upon completing her 12th grade in 2011, she sought to have her mother’s name accurately reflected in her educational certificates. Despite publishing notices in 2014 to update her details, the CBSE did not amend her records.

Feeling aggrieved, Shweta filed a writ petition for legal intervention to rectify her name and parental details in her certificates, framing it as a quest for rightful recognition as her biological mother's child.

Advocate I.S. Dahiya, representing Shweta, argued that she was unjustly denied acknowledgment of her true identity in official records, particularly her educational certificates. It was established that she was born on September 17, 1991, to legally married parents, Dharampal Sangwan and Santosh Kumari. Her birth certificate confirmed Santosh Kumari as her biological mother, and any discrepancies in later records were deemed erroneous and required correction.

Dahiya asserted that her father misrepresented her surname and incorrectly listed his second wife, Kamlesh, as her mother in her 10th-grade certificate, resulting in significant harm, including employment difficulties. He contended that Shweta has the right to have her correct name and parentage reflected in official records, a right protected under Articles 14 and 21 of the Indian Constitution.

In response, Advocate Atul Kumar, representing the CBSE, argued that the petition was barred by delay, as Shweta sought corrections to her 10th-grade certificate issued in 2008 but did not approach the board until 2021. The CBSE contended that Shweta sought not merely corrections but a change in her mother’s name.

Advocate Sameer Singh, representing the school, submitted documents indicating that the school had sent multiple letters to the CBSE in an effort to resolve Shweta’s grievance, but the CBSE failed to take appropriate action.

The court first outlined that “While the letter of the law provides a necessary framework for justice, the true essence of fairness often lies in examining the specific circumstances of each case. Courts exist not only to apply laws but to ensure that justice is done in a way that is responsive to the particular needs of the litigant who is not a file but a human being”. 

The court further emphasized that individuals who seek relief often bring deeply personal struggles to the judicial system, which cannot simply be dismissed on grounds of rigid legal formalism. It’s the Court’s duty to apply the law with compassion and fully understand the specific facts, ensuring that justice serves not only the law but also the people it was created to protect. Denying relief due to a strict interpretation of the law would leave petitioners, like Shweta, without a remedy, especially in cases of unique life circumstances.

In this particular case, Shweta requested that her biological mother’s name replace her stepmother’s name on her Class 10th certificate, which had been recorded while she was living with her father and stepmother. The CBSE, however, argued that their regulations prohibited changing parental names after registration.

The court acknowledged this, but stressed that rigidly adhering to such rules would unjustly deny Shweta her right to be identified by her biological mother’s name, thereby causing her emotional distress. The court pointed out that legal frameworks must be interpreted with flexibility, particularly in unique cases, to avoid injustice. Courts must exercise their discretion to ensure justice prevails, even when procedural rules are strict, and to rectify genuine mistakes.

The court went on to highlight that the right to have one’s biological mother’s name reflected in official documents is a matter of personal choice, identity, and dignity. Denying Shweta’s request would result in unnecessary psychological strain, forcing her to keep her stepmother’s name in official records against her will.

It was further stated that Shweta has a legitimate right to have her biological mother’s name on record, given the emotional and psychological implications of the matter. Her request was seen as both reasonable and justified, with supporting documents such as school records, her birth certificate, and admission forms already reflecting her biological mother’s name.

The court questioned the fairness of holding Shweta responsible for her father’s decisions, which overlooked her relationship with her biological mother. At the time, Shweta was too young to influence such decisions, and the court recognized that the emotional and legal burdens she faced as a result were unfair. It was also noted that Shweta had the right to correct the official records to reflect her true family connections, as recorded when she was first admitted to school.

As a result, the court partly allowed the petition, directing the CBSE to correct Shweta’s name from ‘Shweta Sangwan’ to ‘Shweta’ and update her mother’s name to ‘Smt. Santosh Kumari’ (her biological mother) in her Class 10th certificate. This correction was to be made within one month of the order.

Representation:
- For Petitioner: Advocates I.S. Dahiya, Ankit Dedha, Priyanka S. Aneja, and Anil Kumar
- For CBSE: Advocates Atul Kumar and Aditi Gupta
- For Dyal Singh Public School: Advocates Sameer Singh and Neelam Singh

Case Title: Shweta v CBSE (2024:DHC:7349)