Upholding Rights Over Suspicions – Birth Certificate Issuance Prevails Without Unnecessary DNA Testing: Kerala High Court
TITLE: ROMEO VICTOR AND JENNY CHERUNNY V. CHERANALLOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, SOUTH CHITTOOR, ERNAKULAM AND ORS.
CITATION: WP(C) NO. 447 OF 2024
DECIDED ON: 7 FEBRUARY 2024
CORAM: JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
Facts of the Case
Romeo Victor and Jenny Cherunny, the petitioners, tied the knot on May 2, 2012. On June 26, 2022, the couple welcomed a female child into their household. The birth facts were reported to the Cheranalloor Grama Panchayath in an attempt to finish the registration process, and on June 28, 2022, an application for a birth certificate was duly filed. Suspicions about the child’s birth, however, presented an unforeseen obstacle to the birth certificate’s issue. The suspicions continued even after inquiries were made to a number of government offices, such as the Cheranalloor Panchayat Office, the Health Centre, and the Police Station. In order to clear up any doubts, the police ordered a DNA test for both the parents and the child. Dissatisfied with this development, the petitioners filed a writ petition seeking the issuance of the birth certificate and challenging the insistence on a DNA test.
Issues Involved
Whether the delay in issuing the birth certificate is justified based on suspicions raised by the authorities. Whether the authorities can insist on a DNA test to prove the parentage of the child for the purpose of issuing a birth certificate.
Legal Provisions
Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969:
Section 7: Appointment of Registrars for local areas; duties.
Section 12: Issuance of extract of particulars relating to birth or death.
Section 21: Power to require information.
Section 23: Offences and penalties.
Court’s Observation and Analysis
The marriage certificate, the health certificates, and the baptism certificate were among the relevant documents that the court took into consideration after reviewing the evidence. These documents together confirmed the child’s parentage. The court emphasised the goals of the 1969 Registration of Births and Deaths Act and the Registrar’s obligation to provide birth certificates as soon as possible. The Registrar’s authority is restricted by the court, which made it clear that the Registrar cannot order DNA testing without a valid basis or carry out in-depth investigations. Notably, the court emphasised that, contrary to what the Act states, a mere suspicion does not qualify as reasonable cause. This was made clear by official communication. As a result, the court decided in the petitioners’ favour, ordering the Registrar to expedite the birth certificate application processing within a fortnight and declining to need a DNA test. This ruling emphasises how crucial it is to follow the law, make sure paperwork is completed on time, and avoid unnecessary delays caused by a mere suspicion.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written by- Komal Goswami