Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2024 DAILYLAW 2332 (CAL)

Nisha Rani v. Registrar of Births and Deaths

2024-09-09

Biswaroop Chowdhury

body2024
Judgment : Biswaroop Chowdhury, J. This Writ Application is directed against the inaction of respondent No.1 in not disposing the representation made by the writ petitioner to make necessary correction in the Death Certificate of Alok Ram, the husband of the petitioner since deceased. It is the contention of the petitioner that the petitioner is the legally wedded wife of Shri Alok Ram being married on 19.02.2018 which was duly registered before the Marriage Officer (ADM), South Andaman on 21.11.2019. It is further contended by the petitioner that after her marriage the relationship between the petitioner and her in-laws became strain as a result the petitioner was compelled to file a case under Domestic Violence Act being Misc. Case No. 100 of 2021 before the Court of Judicial Magistrate. It is also contended that during the pendency of the above case, the husband of the petitioner died leaving behind the petitioner and his mother as a surviving legal heir. It is contended by the petitioner that after the death of the petitioner’s husband, the petitioner approached the Respondent No.1 herein for receiving the Death Certificate of her deceased husband, wherefrom the petitioner came to know that the Death Certificate has already been issued to mother-in- law of the petitioner. However, upon the request of the petitioner copy of Death Certificate was given to the petitioner. It is further contended that after receiving a copy of death certificate, the petitioner noted that in the place of “Name of Husband / Wife” her name being the wife was not mentioned in the death certificate. The petitioner enquired about the same from the Respondent No.1 but no proper reply was given. Thereafter, the petitioner by her representation dated 16.07.2024 requested the Respondent No.1 to make necessary correction in the Death Certificate of her husband and also submitted her Marriage Certificate as a proof. It is also contended that the petitioner visited the office of Respondent on several occasions for correction of Death Certificate of her husband but neither the said respondent authority corrected the record nor any proper explanation was given to the petitioner. The petitioner being aggrieved by the inaction of the Respondent No.1 has come up with the instant Writ Application. Pursuant to the filing of the Writ Application the Respondent No.2, the mother-in-law of the petitioner applied to be impleaded as a party. The petitioner being aggrieved by the inaction of the Respondent No.1 has come up with the instant Writ Application. Pursuant to the filing of the Writ Application the Respondent No.2, the mother-in-law of the petitioner applied to be impleaded as a party. Upon being impleaded as a party the Respondent No. 2 filed affidavit-in-opposition, challenging the maintainability of the Writ Petition on the ground of fraud. Although several facts of allegation against the writ petitioner is made but the following main facts are taken into consideration for the purpose of the case:- A. It is contended by the Respondent No. 2 that FIR is lodged against the petitioner at Aberdeen Police Station case No. 107 dated 07.06.2024. B. The petitioner after leaving the matrimonial home after repeated altercation with her husband had instituted a proceeding under the Protection of Woman from Domestic Violence Act before the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Port Blair being Misc. Case No. 100 of 2021 on 16.12.2021, and obtained an ex-parte order under Section 23 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act restraining the Respondent No.2 and other family members from ousting the writ petitioner from shared house-hold. The said Misc. Case was essentially manufactured to pressurize the entire family of the Respondent No.2. C. On each occasion the writ petitioner used to pick up a fight with the Respondent No.2 resorting to physical, mental and verbal abuse of entire family. Having no alternative and suffering huge torture, the Respondent on 27.12.2021 made an application before Learned Judicial Magistrate, Port Blair under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act 2007 against the Writ Petitioner. D. On 03.01.2022 the Writ Petitioner came to her residence, verbally abused and physically assaulted the Respondent No.2 and on two occasions the Respondent No. 2 had to be admitted to hospital for treatment due to injury. E. On 03.01.2022 the Writ Petitioner lodged F.I.R against her husband and the respondent No.2 and her daughter for which Aberdeen Police Station case No. 50 of 2022 dated 03.01.2022 under Section 342/323/504/506/34 of IPC adding Section 498 A was instituted. The respondent No.2 along with her son and daughter were arrested and released on bail. E. On 03.01.2022 the Writ Petitioner lodged F.I.R against her husband and the respondent No.2 and her daughter for which Aberdeen Police Station case No. 50 of 2022 dated 03.01.2022 under Section 342/323/504/506/34 of IPC adding Section 498 A was instituted. The respondent No.2 along with her son and daughter were arrested and released on bail. F. On 18.04.2024 an application was filed by the writ petitioner before the Learned Judicial Magistrate, Additional Court, Port Blair for execution of the earlier order permitting entering the house by the writ petitioner and to reside there in accordance with the Order dated 28.02.2022. The son of the respondent No.2 also filed application for modification of earlier order. After hearing both parties, Learned Court below was pleased to pass an Order directing SHO, Aberdeen Police Station to ensure that the Writ Petitioner was put in proper physical possession of her portion of the shared household being double storied RCC building at Survey No. 57/3, Shadipur village. G. Since the passing of the order from 30.04.2024 to 27.05.2024 there was continuous torture and pressure tactics by the writ petitioner and SHO for which the respondent No. 2 and her son moved a writ application before this Court being WPA No. 243 of 2024 demonstrating police excesses. H. Due to the continued unbearable torture and mental agony caused by the writ petitioner, Alok Ram son of respondent No.2 was found suddenly dead at his office being said to have apparently committed suicide. On 07.06.2024 an F.I.R was lodged being Aberdeen Police Station Case No. 107 dated 07.06.2024 under Section 306/34 of the Indian Penal Code against Nisha Rani, the writ petitioner herein, Praveen Bhusan and Sneha over abetting and instigating the suicide of the respondent’s son late Alok Ram. Heard Learned Advocate for the petitioner and Learned Advocate for the respondent No.1 and Learned Advocate for respondent No.2. Mr. D.C Kabir, Learned Advocate for the respondent No.2 submits that the writ petition is not maintainable on the ground of suppression, on the ground that it seeks to settle private dispute and because of the fact statutes empowers executive authorities to function in a particular manner and the Court cannot direct authorities to consider or act in a way that goes beyond four corners of the statute. Learned Advocate further submits that in the instant writ petition there are several issues that have been completely suppressed by the writ petitioner first of these is F.I.R against the petitioner at Aberdeen Police Station, under Section 306/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Learned Advocate also submits that law requires Succession Certificate, Probates, letters of administration for different circumstances, here the attempt of the petitioner is to avoid all such proper proceedings for fear that the truth will come out, and rather is trying to substitute such materials with a mere death certificate and is attempting to suppression and subterfuge to obtain orders from this Court. It is submitted by the Learned Advocate that the entire issue of cases pending between Alok Ram and his family on one hand and the petitioner on the other hand is completely suppressed. This was very vital for this Court to understand and appreciate the true background of this case and the reason why the petitioner has run in such husk to this Writ Court to obtain an order which will help her to satisfy her illegal intention. Learned Advocate submits that the petitioner has also made many non maintainable prayer outside statute by invoking Article 226 of Constitution of India to settle Private Law Right vis a vis Public Law Right. Learned Advocate draws attention to the prayer made in the writ application wherein petitioner has made a prayer for writ in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondent Authority to rectify the death certificate by incorporating the name of the petitioner as wife. Learned Advocate further submits that Registrar of Births and Deaths is empowered to make entries of the particular of a person relating to his family members. He is also empowered to make alteration to a record in terms of the statute strictly in case where it is so required and /or justify upon due enquiry. Learned Advocate also submits that in the instant case the petitioner did not enter for details as the wife of the deceased Alok Ram for the simple reason that she was the responsible for the death of her husband. Learned Advocate submits that this writ application is not maintainable and this should be dismissed. Learned Advocate also submits that in the instant case the petitioner did not enter for details as the wife of the deceased Alok Ram for the simple reason that she was the responsible for the death of her husband. Learned Advocate submits that this writ application is not maintainable and this should be dismissed. Upon hearing Learned Advocate and considering the facts of this case, this Court is of the view that as much argument is advanced on the ground of fraud at the very outset this Court should address on the issue of fraud. It is well settled that fraud and justice cannot dwell together and fraud vitiates justice. Now, in order to decide as to whether a party has committed fraud upon the Court it is necessary for the Court to ensure first of all as to whether there is any intentional suppression of material facts before the Court or whether there is a mistake of fact. A fact is said to be a material fact where it is vital to be considered for arriving at a decision with regard to an issue. Where a particular fact if disclosed before the Court will disentitle a person to a particular relief is said to be material, or else it cannot be said to be a material fact and the party before the Court cannot be held liable for such suppression. In the instant matter, the grievance of the writ petition is that the respondent No. 1, Registrar of Births and Deaths, Port Blair has not considered the representation for making necessary correction in the death certificate of her deceased husband namely Alok Ram. In the representation before the Registrar, the writ petitioner has submitted the date of death, date of her marriage and have made a prayer for necessary rectification as the name of the wife was not mentioned in the column. As the grievance of the writ petitioner is the inaction of the respondent No.1 in making necessary correction in the death certificate of her husband, the writ petitioner has moved this Court in the writ jurisdiction. Respondent No.2 has contended in the affidavit-in-opposition that there are cases and counter cases against the petitioner the respondent No.2 and her family members including deceased Alok Ram, the husband of the petitioner. Respondent No.2 has contended in the affidavit-in-opposition that there are cases and counter cases against the petitioner the respondent No.2 and her family members including deceased Alok Ram, the husband of the petitioner. The respondent No.2 has contended that as the petitioner has suppressed the case instituted by her as well as against her she is not entitled to a relief in the writ application. Now, upon perusing the writ application it appears that the writ petitioner has stated the date of her marriage annexing marriage certificate, the date of death of her husband and has also contended that after marriage the relationship between the writ petitioner and her in-laws became strain as a result the petitioner was compelled to file a case under Domestic Violence Act being Misc. Case No.100 of 2021 before the Judicial Magistrate. The petitioner has also stated that during the pendency of the case her husband died on 27.05.2024 by committing suicide. In the affidavit-in-opposition although there is mention of case instituted against the writ petitioner which includes F.I.R under Section 306/34 of IPC and also allegation against her but nowhere the respondent No.2 has disputed the marriage between the writ petitioner and Alok Ram. As the marriage of the writ petitioner with her husband Alok Ram since deceased was not dissolved prior to death of Alok Ram, the writ petitioner remains wife of Alok Ram till his death and at present is widow of Alok Ram. The writ petitioner being legally married wife of Alok Ram is entitled to keep in her possession that death certificate of her deceased husband showing herself as his wife. There may be allegation and counter allegation made by respondent No.2 and the writ petitioner in different cases but the case pending in the Court of law are to be decided in accordance with law and till finalization of the case, neither the petitioner nor the respondent no.1 can be said to be guilty of committing any offen ce. The death certificate of a person is of great importance to his wife and family members when after his death the same is required for succession, probate, mutation or even in compassionate appointment and widow/family pension or where there is widow allowance by Government for such allowance. The death certificate of a person is of great importance to his wife and family members when after his death the same is required for succession, probate, mutation or even in compassionate appointment and widow/family pension or where there is widow allowance by Government for such allowance. As the issue of succession and probate is raised by the Learned Advocate for the respondent No.2, this Court is of the view that at this stage, no observation can be made in this regard and it is for the parties to take steps before the competent Court of law and establish their rights. In order to establish rights with regard to Succession, Inheritance or with regard to any allowance from any authority which can be obtained by the widow the existence of a death certificate showing the person claiming for Succession or allowance as wife/widow of the deceased person is very much necessary. Upon perusing the petition and considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this Court is of the view that the writ petitioner has stated out the relevant facts in her petition and cannot be alleged to have suppressed material facts. This Court feels the mental agony of the respondent No.2 and has full sympathy for her but at the same time, the right of the petitioner with regard to obtaining death certificate of her husband by incorporating her name as wife cannot be refused, more so, when the marriage is not disputed by the respondent No.2 and there is no allegation that prior to death the marriage between Alok Ram and writ petitioner was dissolved. In the event the respondent No.2 is of the view that the writ petitioner is not entitled to inherit the property of Alok Ram, the respondent may raise the issue before competent Court to defeat the claim of the writ petitioner but cannot stand in the way of writ petitioner’s name being recorded as wife in the Death Certificate of deceased Alok Ram. With regard to the submission of Learned Advocate for the respondent No.2 that the application for correction of birth certificate should have been made in the prescribed form and not by way of representation, this Court is of the view that it is between the respondent No. 1 authority and the writ petitioner. With regard to the submission of Learned Advocate for the respondent No.2 that the application for correction of birth certificate should have been made in the prescribed form and not by way of representation, this Court is of the view that it is between the respondent No. 1 authority and the writ petitioner. In the event, the respondent No.1 is of the view that the application for correction in the death certificate should be in a prescribed form intimation should be given to the writ petitioner for necessary correction by way of filling up the prescribed form. In the facts and circumstances, this writ application stands disposed of. The respondent No. 1 is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner for correction in the death certificate of her husband namely Alok Ram marked P-3 in the writ application in accordance with law and take necessary steps in this regard. In the event, the respondent No. 1 is of the view that to make correction prescribed form is to be filled up respondent No. 1 shall intimate the same to the petitioner and upon furnishing the said form shall make necessary correction and shall issue the necessary certificate. The entire process shall be concluded within a period of six weeks from the date of communication of this order. WPA No. 404 of 2024 is accordingly disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Urgent Xerox certified copy of this judgement be supplied to the Learned Counsel appearing for the respective parties upon compliance of usual formalities.