Delayed Birth Registration Beyond One Year Can Only Be Ordered By Judicial Magistrate First Class

Bombay High Court 

Why in News? 

Justice Valmiki Menezes, in Savio Jose Xavier Viegas v. Dr. Mariano Godinho (2026), held that delayed registration of a birth beyond one year of its occurrence can be ordered only by a Judicial Magistrate of the First Class under Section 13(3) of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969, and struck down/read down Rule 9 of the Madhya Pradesh Registration of Births and Deaths Rules, 1999 to the extent it permitted an Executive Magistrate to exercise this jurisdiction. 

What was the Background of Savio Jose Xavier Viegas v. Dr. Mariano Godinho (2026) Case? 

• The petitioner had filed a writ petition challenging an order dated December 13, 2023, passed by the Commissioner, Corporation of the City of Panaji, cancelling his birth registration dated November 22, 1999. 
• The petitioner contended that the Registrar had acted in excess of jurisdiction under Section 15 of the Act and had failed to consider the documents produced by him. 
• The petitioner claimed to have been born on June 11, 1975, and his birth had come to be registered only in 1999, when he was already 24 years old, allegedly pursuant to an order dated September 11, 1999 of the Mamlatdar of Tiswadi, functioning as an Executive Magistrate. 

What were the Court's Observations? 

• On the Statutory Scheme for Delayed Registration: 
  The Court held that a combined reading of Section 13(3) and Section 30 of the Act, along with Rule 10 of the 1970 Rules or Rule 9 of the 1999 Rules, shows that entry of a birth after one year of its occurrence must be ordered by a Judicial Magistrate of the First Class and none else, while the Registrar retains power to act where an entry has been fraudulently or improperly made. 
•  
• On the Validity of the 1999 Registration: 
  The Court found that the petitioner's 1999 registration, made when he was already 24 years old, could not have been validly made in the absence of an order of a Magistrate of the First Class, and that his birth could not have been registered in 1999 without such an order.
• On the Inadequacy of an Executive Magistrate's Authority: 
  The Court rejected the contention that an order of the Mamlatdar of Tiswadi, an Executive Magistrate, could satisfy Section 13(3), holding that a Judicial Magistrate of the First Class alone possesses the adjudicatory tools that the provision contemplates, and that the legislative intent was to confer jurisdiction exclusively on a Judicial Magistrate of the First Class.
• On the Validity of Rule 9 of the 1999 Rules: 
  The Court held that the inclusion of an Executive Magistrate in Rule 9 of the Madhya Pradesh Registration of Births and Deaths Rules, 1999 needed to be struck down/read down to the extent it allowed an Executive Magistrate to verify delayed registration of births and deaths, confining such jurisdiction to the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class of the concerned jurisdiction under Section 13(3). 
• The Court accordingly found no case for interference with the impugned order in writ jurisdiction and dismissed the writ petition. 

What is Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969? 

Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969: 

• The Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969 (Act No. 18 of 1969) is a Parliament of India enactment that came into force on May 31, 1969.  
• It provides a uniform, nationwide framework for the registration of births and deaths, enabling comparability of vital statistics across states. It replaced the earlier Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Act, 1886. 

Key Amendments: 

• Delegated Legislation Provisions (Amendment) Act, 1985 (4 of 1985) — amended provisions relating to delegated/subordinate legislation under the Act. 
• Registration of Births and Deaths (Amendment) Act, 2023 (20 of 2023) — introduced in the Lok Sabha on July 26, 2023; passed by the Lok Sabha on August 1, 2023, and by the Rajya Sabha on August 7, 2023. This amendment:  
  • Mandates the Registrar General of India to maintain a national database of registered births and deaths. 
  • Obligates Chief Registrars (appointed by States) and Registrars (appointed for local jurisdictions) to share registered birth and death data with the national database.

Section 13 — Registration of Births and Deaths After Prescribed Time Limit: 

Section 13 lays down a graded mechanism for registering births and deaths that were not recorded within the ordinary time limit, based on how much delay has occurred: 

• Section 13(1): Where a birth or death has not been registered within the prescribed period (ordinarily 21 days), it may still be registered within one year of its occurrence, on:  
  • Payment of the prescribed fee, and 
  • Production of a written declaration in the prescribed form, along with a certificate from the notified authority (as prescribed by the State Government). 
• Section 13(3): A birth or death that has not been registered within one year of its occurrence can be registered only on an order made by a Magistrate of the First Class or a Presidency Magistrate, and after due verification in the prescribed manner and payment of the prescribed fee.