Thank you for birth certificate clarification - Page 10

Originally posted by: DevilsHeart

Just want to understand better - whose consent is needed? The biological father’s or mother’s?

PS when they can be divorced without both being present to submit the papers, roam around with fake documents in first leap without consequences and so on - I doubt that they would show accuracy in other legal procedures.

The legal father's. For that matter, Akshara being a divorcée i.e. single mother did not even require to fill a father's name at all. Let alone be legally obliged to intimate her abusive ex of the paternity of her child.

Originally posted by: Deltablues

The legal father's. For that matter, Akshara being a divorcée i.e. single mother did not even require to fill a father's name at all. Let alone be legally obliged to intimate her abusive ex of the paternity of her child.

Oh so there’s some ambiguity in this scenario. If Akshara left it blank then there wouldn’t be an issue but if she wrote Abhinav’s name then Abhimanyu’s consent would be needed!?

Originally posted by: DevilsHeart

Oh so there’s some ambiguity in this scenario. If Akshara left it blank then there wouldn’t be an issue but if she wrote Abhinav’s name then Abhimanyu’s consent would be needed!?

She only needed Abhinav's consent because legal fatherhood means legal obligations like financial support, inheritence rights etc. She being an unwed mother didn't require Abhimanyu's consent for anything. That woukd have different if Abhir were born before the divorce and had Abhimanyu's name in the birth certificate. Then Abhinav would have required his consent for adoption. But here he assumed the legal fatherhood of an unwed mother's child at birth and married her soon after. Nothing would have happened to Akshnav in a real court lol.

Originally posted by: DevilsHeart

Just want to understand better - whose consent is needed? The biological father’s or mother’s?

PS when they can be divorced without both being present to submit the papers, roam around with fake documents in first leap without consequences and so on - I doubt that they would show accuracy in other legal procedures.

If a child is born after the divorce then the biological husband will remain the father of the kid

https://m.timesofindia.com/india/no-question-on-paternity-if-child-born-within-280-days-of-marriage-dissolution-bombay-hc/articleshow

Also, it is against the law to put another man's name on the birth certificate

Yes, it is against the law to put another man's name on a birth certificate when someone else is the father in India. This act is considered a criminal offense under the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

The relevant sections of the IPC that deal with this offense are Sections 464, 465, and 468. Section 464 defines "making a false document" as a criminal offense. Section 465 defines "punishment for forgery" and Section 468 defines "forgery for the purpose of cheating".

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1719946/

Here Nav had to legally adopt abhir through a court's order to be called the legal father. This if abhimanyu disowna the kid.

Thank you!!!!

I too was looking for an answer to this!!

And that was my question too, as she got pregnant when they were still in the marriage.

It is very much evident from abhir's DOB. Then how can she declare someone else as legal father??

Originally posted by: JustaFan13

Thank you!!!!

I too was looking for an answer to this!!

And that was my question too, as she got pregnant when they were still in the marriage.

It is very much evident from abhir's DOB. Then how can she declare someone else as legal father??

I also find this whole brouhaha that court cannot give custody to the father only because of financial condition quite 🤔

because in the case of Sanju v. Sobhanath

HC Writ Pet No 21335 of 1994, Allahabad High Court reported in 2 (1994 ) D.M.C page 616.

Father was given child custody because he has a better financial condition than the mother and similar thing happened in the kabra case. Where the mother was asked to send the child to fathers residence

The out come of cases varies depending on facts and circumstances and how well the lawyers presents your case

Exactly!!!

It says the court can grant custody to the father, if the mother's financial condition is not good.

And in this case, she is not a single mother either.

Originally posted by: Bloody-Mary

i don't think they will found this on abhira Eleanor's page on insta:

If a child is born after the divorce then the biological husband will remain the father of the kid

https://m.timesofindia.com/india/no-question-on-paternity-if-child-born-within-280-days-of-marriage-dissolution-bombay-hc/articleshow

Also, it is against the law to put another man's name on the birth certificate

Yes, it is against the law to put another man's name on a birth certificate when someone else is the father in India. This act is considered a criminal offense under the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

The relevant sections of the IPC that deal with this offense are Sections 464, 465, and 468. Section 464 defines "making a false document" as a criminal offense. Section 465 defines "punishment for forgery" and Section 468 defines "forgery for the purpose of cheating".

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1719946/

Here Nav had to legally adopt abhir through a court's order to be called the legal father. This if abhimanyu disowna the kid.

I don’t know all these details at all…so thank you for educating audience like me…but just from a common sense perspective I would not expect the mom to Willy nilly put a random persons name as dad especially since it is not needed and that too in todays day n age …baaki sab toh legal jargon hai

Originally posted by: Bloody-Mary

i don't think they will found this on abhira Eleanor's page on insta:

If a child is born after the divorce then the biological husband will remain the father of the kid

https://m.timesofindia.com/india/no-question-on-paternity-if-child-born-within-280-days-of-marriage-dissolution-bombay-hc/articleshow

Also, it is against the law to put another man's name on the birth certificate

Yes, it is against the law to put another man's name on a birth certificate when someone else is the father in India. This act is considered a criminal offense under the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

The relevant sections of the IPC that deal with this offense are Sections 464, 465, and 468. Section 464 defines "making a false document" as a criminal offense. Section 465 defines "punishment for forgery" and Section 468 defines "forgery for the purpose of cheating".

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1719946/

Here Nav had to legally adopt abhir through a court's order to be called the legal father. This if abhimanyu disowna the kid.

Which part of "forgery for the purpose of cheating" does this satisy? Like the show the has shown, the hospital owned by the biological father's family attested to the miscarriage of the previous pregnancy, the biological father kicked out a miscarrying woman which is a criminal offence under DV act, Abhir was born after seven months of moving in with Abhinav, a full term pregnancy being 38 weeks. A preterm pregnancy can happen anytime. She could say that she did not know that Abhimanyu was the father and she feared for her her life from a family that was senselessly accusing her of murder, or she could tell that she did try to tell him, and he didn't pick up and/or said that he didn't want anything to do with her baby lol. In any case, the court would have called for a paternity test and Abhimanyu would still be in jail under DV act.

https://m.timesofindia.com/india/woman-cant-be-thrown-out-even-if-house-not-owned-by-husband-sc/articleshow/78691200.cms

If she had competent lawyers, Birlas would have all been in jail lol.

https://www.kaanoon.com/326943/removing-name-of-non-biological-father-from-birth-certificate

"Paternity fraud" is a civil suit and not a criminal suit. No police station will file a case lol

Also, the act you stated is of 1872 and assumes that Akshnav were not married at the time of birth. This is again one of those ambiguous things shown in the show.

Section 112 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872

112. Birth during marriage, conclusive proof of legitimacy.—The fact that any person was born during the continuance of a valid marriage between his mother and any man, or within two hundred and eighty days after its dissolution, the mother remaining unmarried, shall be conclusive proof that he is the legitimate son of that man, unless it can be shown that the parties to the marriage had no access to each other at any time when he could have been begotten.

Abhir is a premature baby and she was already 2-3 months pregnant when the kaand happened.

You are right, if Akshara had taken legal action 6 yrs back, it did make sense and definitely court would have granted custody to Akshara and punished abhi.

But now!!! She herself has forged the document. Hid the child from his parent and her own family.

And you are saying that now she should lie about abhi being the biological father??? Isn't that punishable offence too???