Recognising Single Mother As 'Complete Parent' Is Not Charity: Bombay High Court Orders Removal Of Father's Name From Child's School Record
Recognition of a single mother as a complete parent for a child's civic identity is not an act of charity; it is constitutional fidelity and also reflects the movement from patriarchal compulsion to constitutional choice, from lineage as fate to dignity as right, the Bombay High Court observed recently while ordering modification of a minor girl's school records, by removing her father's name and also correcting her 'caste' from 'Maratha' (father's caste) to her mother's caste - 'Mahar' under the Scheduled Caste.
Sitting at Aurangabad seat, the division bench of Justice Vibha Kankanwadi and Justice Hiten Venegavkar emphasised on the need to recognise the rights of single mothers, who exclusively raise their child on their own.
"Recognition of a single mother as a complete parent for purposes of a child's civic identity is not an act of charity; it is constitutional fidelity. It reflects the movement from patriarchal compulsion to constitutional choice, from lineage as fate to dignity as right. A society that claims to be developing cannot insist that a child's public identity must be anchored to a father who is absent from the child's life, while the mother, who bears the entire burden of upbringing, remains administratively secondary. The State's formats must not become moral judgments; they must become accurate instruments of welfare," the judgment pronounced on February 2 reads.
The judges made it clear that a correction that substitutes the mother's name and surname in place of the father's name and surname, when the mother is the sole guardian and caregiver, does not subvert any public purpose but it advances accuracy, protects the child's welfare, and aligns with the State's own policy direction that mother's name is mandatory in government documentation.
The judges noted that Article 21 protects not merely existence, but life with dignity; and dignity includes the right to an identity that is not forcibly tethered to an absent parent where such tethering serves no welfare purpose and causes avoidable social harm.
"A school record is not a private note; it is a public document that follows a child across years, institutions, and sometimes into the professional domain. A child raised exclusively by her mother cannot be compelled to carry, as the State's chosen description of her, the father's name and surname merely because the format once demanded it. If the lived guardianship is maternal, the record cannot insist on paternal visibility as a matter of routine, and then call it administrative neutrality," the judges observed.
Further while referring to Article 14 of Constitution of India, the bench stated that the assumption that identity must flow through the father is not a neutral administrative default; it is a social presumption inherited from a patriarchal structure that treated lineage as male property and women as appendages for purposes of public identity.
"To insist on this presumption in contemporary India, especially in cases of single motherhood and exclusive maternal custody, imposes a structural burden upon women and their children. It makes the mother fully visible for responsibility and accountability, but insufficiently visible for purposes of identity. Such an asymmetry violates the equality principle, because it makes constitutional citizenship contingent upon a male conduit even when the male conduit is absent, severed, or irrelevant to welfare," reads the judgment authored by Justice Venegavkar.
The bench held that an administration that insists the father's name is indispensable but the mother's name is optional does not merely follow a “custom”; it reproduces inequality through documentation.
The Directive Principles under Article 39(f) and Article 46 casts a duty on the State to ensure that educational records do not become documents of stigma or injury. "The question is not whether the State can accommodate the mother's identity; it is whether the State can refuse to do so when refusal harms the child and is justified only by bureaucratic habit. The Constitution requires the State to evolve," the bench opined.
As regards the plea for changing the caste of the child, the bench agreed with the State that caste entries cannot be altered casually, and that a school is not itself a caste-adjudicating body.
"But we emphatically do not agree that the State may, by a rigid and patriarchal default rule, compel a child who is and will be raised solely by her Scheduled Caste mother, and permanently severed from the father; (a) to carry the caste identity of the father in school records, and (b) to suffer the lifelong consequences of that imposed identity, particularly when the record itself discloses the father's role as an accused in a grave offence," the bench said.
The judges expressed the fact that they are conscious of two legitimate concerns: (i) caste certificates are susceptible to misuse, and (ii) schools should not become substitute caste verification authorities and thus, held that the relief must be structured in a manner that protects the child while preserving the statutory scheme for issuance and verification of caste certificates.
"The paramount consideration remains the welfare and best interest of the child. To compel the minor to carry, in her educational records, the caste identity of a person who has completely disconnected himself from her would be contrary to social reality and fairness. The correction sought does not amount to a voluntary alteration of caste by agreement, but rather to a rectification of the record so that it reflects the true social and legal position in the peculiar facts of the present case. Therefore, correction of the caste entry in the school record on the basis of the mother's caste falls within the permissible scope of rectification of an obvious mistake and warrants interference," the bench held.
The judges further said that social dimension is not an ornament to the legal reasoning; it is the very context in which constitutional rights operate. In India, the bench underscored, name and caste entries in school records can shape social perception, peer conduct, access to entitlements, and the child's own psychological sense of belonging.
"If the child is raised entirely within the mother's household and community, and will have no functional ties to the father's community, insisting that she carry the father's caste entry may expose her to rejection from that community while simultaneously creating confusion and vulnerability in the milieu where she actually lives. The Constitution's promise is not that the State will preserve old social assumptions; it is that the State will protect dignity and equal citizenship, particularly for children, who cannot be made to bear the consequences of adult conduct or social prejudice," the judges held.
Facts:
The strongly-worded order was passed on a plea filed jointly by a 12-year-old girl and her mother seeking to change the girl's school records by deleting the name and surname of her father and also his father's case and substitute the same with her mother's name, surname and caste.
The mother in the instant case was a victim of rape at the hands of the man, who later on after DNA tests, was confirmed to be the biological father of the girl child born to the woman. Subsequently, the mother and the rape accused father had signed an agreement confirming that the said father will have no role or relation in the life of the child and would stay away from the child and her mother and that the mother would solely raise the daughter. However, because of the 'routine' manner of filling in details, the child's birth certificate and school records reflected the father's name.
When the mother sought to change the same, the school authorities refused to do the same which compelled the mother and the daughter to petition the High Court.
The judges noted the petitioner' contention that without any meaningful rebuttal that the child will have no relationship with the biological father henceforth, and that the Maratha community would never accept her as one of them given the total absence of ties and socialisation, whereas she is being raised exclusively within the Mahar Scheduled Caste milieu of her mother.
"It is precisely this lived reality that constitutional courts have insisted must be examined rather than substituted by presumptions. The accused–father committed rape resulting in the birth of the child and, under the recorded settlement, unequivocally declared that he would have no relationship, responsibility or role in the upbringing of the minor. The mother has since been the sole person managing and raising the child. The minor, now aged about twelve years, has grown up exclusively in the social environment of the mother and within her caste community," the bench noted.
Referring to various provisions of the Constitution of India including Articles 14, 15, 21 and also the Directive Principles, the judges said that these are not rhetorical flourishes; they are interpretive compasses. "When State authorities wield subordinate 'codes of conduct' to deny a minor child relief that directly touches her dignity and future, constitutional adjudication must intervene," the bench remarked.
With these observations, the bench ordered the authorities to modify the school records of the girl.
Appearance:
Advocate Sanghmitra Wadmare appeared for the Petitioner.
Assistant Government Pleader VM Kagne represented the State and also the School.
Case Title: XYZ vs State of Maharashtra (Writ Petition 15528 of 2025)
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 71