The Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court recently directed the correction of the school records of a 12‑year‑old girl born out of rape to reflect only her single mother’s name and caste.

The Court held that such official documentation cannot fossilise one's identity or perpetuate patriarchal assumptions about lineage.

A Division Bench of Justice Vibha Kankanwadi and Justice Hiten S Venegavkar also commented on the need to recognise single mothers in such matters.

The Court observed that society cannot insist that a child's identity remains anchored to her absent father in public records when it is the mother who bears the entire burden of raising the child.

"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 ... Recognition of a single mother as the full source of a child’s civic identity name including lineage descriptor, and caste, where the facts warrant, does not dilute the society, but on the contrary it civilizes it," the Court held.

It proceeded to order that the child’s mother's name be reflected in her school records, and that the child's caste detail be changed from Maratha to Scheduled Caste – Mahar, in line with her mother’s community, subject to the statutory caste‑certificate process.

The Court was dealing with a petition filed by a minor, through her mother, challenging the refusal of the Education Officer and school authorities in Beed to change her name and caste in the General Register and allied records to reflect her single mother's details.

The girl’s biological father, the Court noted, was accused of sexually assaulting the mother and had renounced all relationship and guardianship over the child based on a settlement arrived at in 2022.

The Court noted that since the father was not part of the child’s life in any legal or functional sense, the continuation of his name and surname in the child's school records was not only inaccurate but an avoidable social vulnerability.

The Court held that the continued reflection of the father’s details, including his caste, in the school records did not correspond to the child's lived social identity or the fact that her mother was her sole legal guardian.

"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 Court added.

The Court further observed that the relief sought by the minor is to ensure that official records do not become instruments of compulsory and stigmatic attachment.

The Bench ultimately rejected the authorities’ stand that the Secondary School Code did not permit such changes. 

“Administrative registers exist to record facts in aid of welfare and governance; they are not meant to fossilise identity irrespective of changed circumstances ... where continuation of paternal identity in records risks stigma, the State cannot refuse even to consider correction by mechanically invoking the Secondary School Code," the Court held.

The Court added that practices that treat paternal identity as the singular conduit of caste - regardless of custody, upbringing, abandonment, violence, or social acceptance - entrench structural inequalities.

Before concluding the judgment, the Bench also highlighted the following social message:

“When the law acknowledges that a mother can be the sole and complete parent in every meaningful sense, it does not merely do justice between litigants/parties but it affirms the Constitution’s promise that individuals, especially children, are not to be punished for the circumstances of their birth and wrong of their parents.”

Advocate Sanghmitra Wadmare appeared for the minor.

Additional government pleader VM Kagne appeared for the State.

[Read Judgment]