Divorcee can’t make children retain his name: HC

The judge stated that the identity of the children was at stake

A divorcee cannot insist on his children retaining his name and surname if he has given up his custodial rights to them, the Bombay high court said last week.

Justice Patel also rejected the husband’s plea to “check on welfare of his children”, noting that there was nothing in his plea to indicate that they were being harmed. (HT File Photo)

The court had been rejecting the plea of a man who complained that after he separated from his wife, she sought to change their minor children’s names.

“As to whether the defendant [the husband] is entitled to demand that the minors should carry his name, given that the mother has been granted custody of them, and he has given up the right to see them, I do not think it is possible for him to press this claim,” said Justice Gautam Patel, while rejecting the husband’s plea to restore the birth names of his son and daughter.

The couple had amicably settled their matrimonial dispute under consent terms submitted to the high court in February 2015. Under the terms of settlement, his wife was granted custody of the children. The husband had given up his custodial rights. Eight months later, the husband noticed an advertisement in a city tabloid declaring that both his children had changed their names, assuming the name of their mother as their middle name and her maiden name as their surname.

The husband then approached the high court, saying that the names of his children were changed by his wife purportedly on the basis of joint affidavit. He urged the court to direct the restoration of their birth names – his first name as their middle name and his surname as their surname.

“The paternity of the children is not in doubt,” said the judge. “What is at stake here is the identity they wish to carry or which the mother wishes them to carry for the rest of their lives. It is not for the father in these circumstances to impose his will on either the mother or on these children,” the judge added.

Justice Patel also rejected the husband’s plea to “check on welfare of his children”, noting that there was nothing in his plea to indicate that they were being harmed. “Once again, I find children being used as instruments in a battle between two adults. This I will not allow,” said the judge.