Sanjoy Kumar Das vs The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Raja Basu Chowdhury, J (Oral):

The instant writ petition has been filed, inter alia, praying for a direction upon the respondent nos. 2 and 3 to consider and dispose of the petitioner’s application/representation and demand of justice dated 10^th June, 2026 for correction of the name of the petitioner’s minor son in the birth certificate from “Balendu Das” to “Bibaswan Das”.

When the matter was initially moved on 22^nd July, 2026, this Court noting that the petitioner has not disclosed the birth certificate issued by the nursing home and the biological mother of the male child has also not come forward, as such, since the Court was unable to ascertain whether the birth certificate as disclosed in page 14 corresponds to the male child who is a student, had granted leave to the petitioner to file a supplementary affidavit. The Officer-in-Charge, Dum Dum Police Station was also directed to cause an enquiry and file a report.

By the above order dated 22^nd July, 2026, this Court had also directed the learned Registrar General to communicate this order to the Officer-in-Charge of Dum Dum Police Station.

Perused the office report counter signed by the learned Registrar General dated 31^st July, 2026.

Pursuant to the aforesaid, the Officer-in-Charge, Dum Dum Police Station has filed a report and has stated that a discreet enquiry was conducted regarding the genuineness of the prayer made by the petitioner. It has been stated that the petitioner had claimed that his son was born on 22^nd August, 2011 at Tulip Nursing Home Pvt. Ltd., 96, Rishi Bankim Chandra Road, Kolkata – 700028 and his son’s birth certificate was issued by South Dum Dum Municipality on 7^th December, 2011. In such certificate the name of the child was inadvertently recorded as “Balendu Das” instead of his actual name “Bibaswan Das”. It has also been stated that the jurisdictional Officer-in-Charge had verified the following documents in original:-

PAN Card bearing No. HLRPD7185L in the name of “Bibaswan Das”.

The report further records that during enquiry it was learnt that the child is known to all as “Bibaswan Das” and all his educational identity and financial records uniformly bear the name “Bibaswan Das” except for the birth certificate, and no other document shows the name “Balendu Das”. It is also further recorded that no criminal antecedent or adverse report could be found against the applicant and his family during enquiry and that there is no rival claim or dispute regarding the identity of the child.

Let a copy of the aforesaid report as placed before this Court be taken on record.

The petitioner has since filed a supplementary affidavit affirmed by Usha Barua Das, the biological mother of the child,and in such supplementary affidavit the Aadhaar Card issued by the Unique Identification Authority of India in favour of the biological mother of the child has been disclosed. Apart from the marriage certificate and the discharge certificate issued by Tulip Nursing Home on 25^th August, 2011, the birth certificate of the minor child has also been disclosed. The deponent of the supplementary affidavit claims that she supports the prayer for correction of the name of the child.

Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and having considered the materials on record, it appears that the recording of the name of the minor child in the register might have been on the basis of a genuine mistake. Further, there appears no criminal antecedent or any adverse report could be found against the petitioner or his family members and no rival claim or dispute regarding the identity of the child has also come to the notice of the police authorities in course of the enquiry. The documents relied on by the petitioner were also found to be genuine.

In the peculiar facts and noting Section 15 of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969, do provide for correction of entry in the register of births and deaths, I direct the concerned respondents to take an informed decision in the matter and correct the name of the petitioner’s son and issue an appropriate corrigendum to that effect. It is expected that the process of carrying out correction and issuance of corrigendum would be completed within two weeks from the date of communication of this order.

With the above observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of.

Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be made available to the parties upon compliance of requisite formalities.