Allahabad High Court Flags Massive Irregularities in Uttar Pradesh Birth Certificate System

The Allahabad High Court has strongly criticised the functioning of Uttar Pradesh’s birth certificate issuance system, describing it as a “mess” and reflective of dishonesty operating at multiple administrative levels. The court’s observations came during the hearing of a writ petition that exposed the ease with which multiple birth certificates with conflicting details can be obtained in the state.


Case Background: Two Birth Certificates, Two Different Dates of Birth

Facts of the Petition

The issue surfaced during the hearing of a writ petition filed by an individual named Shivanki.
The Deputy Director of UIDAI, Regional Office, Lucknow, submitted documents that revealed the petitioner possessed two separate birth certificates, both issued by the Registrar of Births and Deaths, but:

  • from two different authorities, and

  • with two different dates of birth.

Details of the Conflicting Certificates

  1. Certificate 1:

    • Issued by: Primary Health Centre, Manauta

    • Date of birth recorded: 10 December 2007

  2. Certificate 2:

    • Issued by: Gram Panchayat, Har Singhpur

    • Date of birth recorded: 1 January 2005

The court remarked that the ease of obtaining such contradictory certificates indicates a systemic failure enabling document manipulation across the state.


High Court’s Observations: A System “Reflecting Dishonesty at All Levels”

A Division Bench comprising Justice Atul Sreedharan and Justice Anish Kumar Gupta made several sharp remarks:

  • The system allows people to obtain a birth certificate with any date they desire, from anywhere in the state.

  • Such documents can act as strong prima facie evidence, even in criminal cases, thereby creating risk of misuse.

  • The situation shows the extent of dishonesty prevalent in the administrative mechanism for issuing civil registration documents.

The court described the entire mechanism as “prima facie, a mess”.


Court Directions: Accountability and Reforms Demanded

Affidavit from Principal Secretary (Medical Health)

The High Court directed the Principal Secretary, Medical Health Department, responsible for overseeing issuance of birth certificates, to file a detailed affidavit, explaining:

  • the existing processes governing birth certificate issuance,

  • reasons for such widespread irregularities, and

  • steps currently in place to prevent fraudulent or duplicate certificates.

Reform Measures to Be Suggest

The Principal Secretary must also propose:

  • corrective measures to prevent issuance of multiple certificates,

  • mechanisms to ensure only one birth certificate is ever issued for an individual,

  • improvements to digital or administrative safeguards.

The matter is posted for further hearing on 10 December.


Statutory Provisions Involved

1. Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969 (RBD Act)

This is the primary legislation regulating the registration and certification of births and deaths in India.

Relevant provisions include:

  • Section 7 – Appointment of Registrars for different areas.

  • Section 8 – Duty of certain persons to inform the Registrar about a birth.

  • Section 13 – Delayed registration and the conditions for issuing certificates.

  • Section 17 – Power to issue extracts (certified copies) from the register of births and deaths.

  • Section 23 – Penalties for false information, fraud, or improper registration.

The existence of multiple certificates with differing information indicates violations of Sections 17 and 23, and a failure of systematic verification under Sections 7 and 13.


Constitutional Provisions Implicated

1. Article 14 – Right to Equality

A system that allows arbitrary issuance of contradictory certificates reflects a violation of Article 14, as it:

  • enables discriminatory and unequal administrative practices,

  • fails to ensure uniform, non-arbitrary procedures.

2. Article 21 – Right to Life (includes Right to Identity)

Accurate birth registration is foundational to:

  • legal identity,

  • access to government benefits,

  • protection from identity manipulation or fraud.

Irregularities undermine the constitutional right to dignity and legal identity.

3. Article 41 and Article 47 (Directive Principles)

These impose obligations on the state to maintain adequate public administration and public health systems, including accurate vital statistics.


Judicial Precedents Relevant to the Issue

1. Lalita Kumari v. Govt. of Uttar Pradesh (2014) 2 SCC 1

While primarily a criminal law judgment, the Court highlighted the importance of record integrity and the danger posed by document manipulation. It underlines the need for reliable, tamper-proof public records.

2. R. Rajagopal v. State of Tamil Nadu (1994) 6 SCC 632

This judgment expanded Article 21 to include a person’s right to have control over their personal information and identity, emphasizing the importance of accuracy in official records.

3. ABC v. State (NCT of Delhi) (2015) 10 SCC 1

The Court noted the crucial role of birth certificates in establishing identity, parentage, and rights, reminding authorities of their duty to maintain accuracy and reliability in civil registration.

4. Mohd. Shahabuddin v. State of Bihar (2010) 4 SCC 653

The Supreme Court cautioned against misuse of forged documents in criminal prosecutions—relevant because the Allahabad HC expressed concern over fraudulent birth certificates enabling misuse in criminal trials.

5. High Court Precedents

Several High Courts have previously flagged issues regarding:

  • duplicate certificates,

  • delayed registration fraud,

  • lack of unified digital records.

These reinforce the need for systemic reform.


Conclusion: A Call for Structural Overhaul in UP’s Civil Registration System

The Allahabad High Court’s strong remarks signal that Uttar Pradesh’s birth certification process requires immediate restructuring. With multiple certificates showing conflicting details, the system jeopardises the authenticity of identity documents and opens avenues for misuse in civil and criminal contexts.

The Court’s direction to the Principal Secretary to file an affidavit and propose systemic corrections indicates the judiciary's firm stance on ensuring accountability and preventing identity-based fraud.

The December 10 hearing will be crucial in determining:

  • the future of digital civil registration in the state,

  • the steps the government must adopt to restore credibility, and

  • safeguards necessary to prevent exploitation of vital identity documents.



Comments

Popular posts

Father of RG Kar Victim Loses Faith in Legal System Amid Allegations of CBI Inconsistencies

Bill Gates Applauds India's 'Namo Drone Didi' Program: A Game-Changer in Rural Empowerment and Agri-Tech

Flight Operations Disrupted Amid India-Pakistan Tensions: Air India and IndiGo Cancel Multiple Flights on May 13, 2025

Your Complete Online Guide to Land Records and Services in Bihar

Equality Before Law

Evolution of Constitution under Article 14 to 18

Supreme Court Advocates for Childcare and Feeding Rooms in Public Spaces

Delhi High Court Grants Bail to Former Bank Manager Accused of Defrauding Woman of ₹13 Crores

Rights of a Arrested Person in India

India vs Pressure: Why New Delhi Is Not Backing Down on Russian Oil Amid Global Scrutiny