The Registration of Births and Deaths Act affirms the legal spouse's precedence over claims by others regarding official documentation of marriage.

JUDGMENT :

Per: Justice Vivek Rusia This appeal under Section 2 (1) of the Madhya Pradesh Uchha Nayalaya (Khand Nyayapeeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005 has been filed by the appellant (respondent No.2 in writ petition) challenging the order dated 05.02.2025 whereby Writ Petition No. 9211 of 2024 filed by writ petitioner has been allowed.

2. As per the facts of the case, Late Hemendra Singh Pawar was married to the writ petitioner-Shaila Raje Pawar (respondent No. 2 herein) on 29.12.1999 as per the Hindu Rites and Rituals. Respondent No.2 gave birth to their son Prathmeshwar Singh Pawar in the year 2008. On 06.11.2023, Hemendra Singh Pawar died due to illness. Appellant-Kiran Singh claiming herself to be the second wife of Late Hemendra Singh Pawar, obtained a death certificate mentioning her name as wife of the deceased. The writ petitioner sent a legal notice and applied for correction in the Death Certificate. The Municipal Corporation issued a corrected Death Certificate by mentioning the name of writ petition as wife of Late Hemendra Singh Pawar but also mentioned the name of the present appellant within bracket as under :

“Name of husband/wife : Shaila Raje Pawar (Kiran Singh)”.

3. Being aggrieved by the above additional name of Kiran Singh, the writ petitioner approached the writ Court by way of writ petition. The petition was opposed by the respondent/appellant on various grounds. The learned writ Court examined the facts related to inter se claim of the petitioner and appellant being legally married wife of Late Hemendra Singh Pawar and held that the writ petitioner is the legally married first wife, therefore, she alone is entitled to get her name recorded in the Death Certificate. The writ petition was allowed by directing the respondent No.1/Registrar of Births and Deaths, Municipal Corporation, Indore to correct the entry in the Death Certificate and thereafter issue a fresh death certificate only mentioning the name of petitioner as wife of the deceased Hemendra Singh Pawar. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, appellant has approached this Court by way of the present appeal.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the writ Court did not examine Section 15 of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act of 1969’) which authorises the Registrar to correct the entry in the certificate without any alteration of the original entry, meaning thereby that the Death Certificate mentioning the name of present appellant as the wife was liable to be maintained even if the name of respondent No.2/writ petitioner has been added. Learned counsel for the appellant further submitted that the State Government framed the Madhya Pradesh Registration of Births and Deaths Rules, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Rules 1999’) in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 30 of the Act of 1969. Rule 11 provides the procedure for Correction or cancellation of entry in the register of births and deaths as provided under Section 15 of the Act of 1969, which also provides that after correcting the entry, the Registrar shall send an extract of the entry showing the error and the manner in which it has been corrected to the State Government.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties.

5. The Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969 is enacted to regulate the registration of births and death and for the matters connected thereto. Under Section 3 of the Act of 1969, the Central Government by notification in the Official Gazette appoints a person to be known as the Registrar-General, India. Under Section 4 of