INTRODUCTION

There are no illegitimate children - only illegitimate parents. - Leon R. Yankwich1 ILLEGITIMACY Certainty of paternity has been considered important in a wide range of eras and cultures, especially when inheritance and citizenship were at stake, making the tracking of a man's estate and genealogy a central part of what defined a "legitimate" birth. The ancient Latin dictum, "Mater semper certa est" ("The mother is always certain", while the father is not) emphasized the dilemma. WHO ARE LEGITIMATE & ILLEGITIMATE CHILDREN? IN INDIA Law has classified children into two categories, namely, the legitimate and illegitimate children. The legitimate children are the outcome of a marriage valid in the eyes of Law while those who are born out of wedlock or where the marriage is invalid, irregular or void are said to be illegitimate children. As regards legitimate children there is no problem of their legal rights but there do arise certain problems in case of illegitimate children.2

IN ENGLAND In common law, legitimacy is the status of a child born to parents who are legally married to each other; and of a child conceived before the parents receive a legal divorce. Conversely, illegitimacy (or bastardy) is the status of a child born outside marriage. The consequences of illegitimacy have pertained mainly to a child's rights of inheritance to the putative father's estate and the child's right to bear the father's surname or title. Illegitimacy has also had consequences for the mother's and child's right to support from the putative father.3

1 2

Leon Rene Yankwich (September 25, 1888 February 9, 1975) was a United States federal judge. http://indiankanoon.org/doc/4639/ 3 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legitimacy_(law)

Page 1 of 17

VIEWS REGARDING ILLEGITIMATE CHILD

ANCIENT INDIA Ancient India has a very hypocritical view regarding an illegitimate child. The various religious texts in the Hindu mythology are surrounded with great people who were illegitimate children and had no paternal certainty. Let us take the example of The Mahabharata4. Being a popular epic it is like a mirror of the society and gives an insight into Indian societys (mainly Hindus) attitude towards life. The epic also plays a significant role in conditioning the Indian mind as it is widely read (may be in fragments) and watched over television. The epic was composed and interpolated with many passages from 400 B.C. to A.D. 400. Illegitimate children in the society are often stigmatized. The treatment given to the illegitimate children in the epic is indicative of the way the Hindu society treats its illegitimate children. The project examines the treatments given to the illegitimate children in the epic and the response of the children to stigmatization and discrimination. Through the reading of the epic one can understand the trauma and humiliation that the illegitimate children had to face in the society. The problem plagues the Hindu society in general and is not unique for the people in the North East. But as there are large numbers of Hindu population in the North east, exploration of the treatment of the illegitimate children is relevant. Humiliated and stigmatized, the illegitimate children also find out different defense mechanism to negotiate this discrimination in the society.5 1. Vyasa. Vyasa, the illegitimate child was born out of the pre-marital relation of the sage Parashara and Satyavati. Nothing is known about the early life of Vyasa, except that he was trained by his father. He was suddenly brought into limelight to save his mothers kingdom from the crisis. King Shantan dies and also Chitarngad and Vichitravirya; the legitimate sons of Shantanu and Satyavati. As the kingdom is without successor, Satyavati first ask Bhishma to perform Niyoga (levirate) on the widows of Vichitravirya in order to have heir to the throne.
4

The Mahabharata or Mahbhrata is one of the two major Sanskrit epics of ancient India, the other being the Ramayana. Its author is Vyasa. 5 This has been taken as a reference from the given link: http://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.edu.documents/31258460/Illegitimate_children_in_the_Hindu_Society.docx ?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAI5BFST3KI667TFIQ&Expires=1383292693&Signature=EKPmbEBhZMWhYrhYD 06W8JoNdmI%3D

Page 2 of 17

As Bhishma refuses, Satyavati summons Vyasa. As no legitimate son is left, Illegitimate is summoned as a matter of necessity! Through this episode he is brought to light and later receives a respectable treatment throughout the narration of the epic. He is portrayed as composure of the epic and the grandfatherly figure. Does it indicate that Vyasas Sattvik nature and his pursuit of spiritual knowledge had reduced/eradicated the stigma for being a pre-marital child? But do all the pre-marital children get stigmatized in the epic? The epic do not give a straight single answer. Satyavatis pre-marital son i.e. Vyasa is acknowledged, though rather late, but Kunti is forced to abandon the pre-marital child Karna and only acknowledges him after his death. Does the society acknowledge the illegitimate children when they no longer pose a threat to their reputation? Or when the situation arises when there are more important things to take care than reputation. Vyasa do not have any political ambition and do not pose any threat to the claimant to the throne. It is also likely that the social regulation were different for the Kshatriya princess Kunti and different for the low caste Nishada girl Satyavati. It is likely that as Satyavati got a marriage proposal from the royal family that her pre-marital son was thrown into oblivion to project her as a virgin. He was brought to the light later on when much time had lapsed and the pre-marital son had acquired a reputation of being a great ascetic. Probably the transgression of young age loses its stigma when one grows old and if the illegitimate son proves to be worthy, the intensity of illegitimacy goes down.6 2. Karna. In contrast to the respectable treatment given to Vyasa, Karna is constantly stigmatized for being a Sutputra, i.e. son of a charioteer. Karnas birth is mytholized, obviously to hide the sexual transgression of Kunti. But there is a murmuring in the epic that always surrounds Karna. He is made aware that he was found floating in the river. Thus he seems to be unsure of his identity. It is probably due to this confusion we find the traces of contradiction in him. In some situations he appears to be extremely virtuous. He donates his natural armor, to keep his vow of not refusing anything to the Brahmin. He also refuses to change side and switch over to the Pandavas even if he is offered kingship. He also requests Krishna not to divulge the secret of his birth to Yudhishthira, as Yudhishthira will then give away the kingdom to Karna and Karna under the obligation of Duryodhana will hand over the kingdom to Duryodhana. He also admits that Yudhishthira is better suited to become a king. But, there
6

Ibid

Page 3 of 17

are many dark spots on Karna like his instigation to Dushasana in the Sabha Parva to disrobe Draupadi which is indicative that he did had a streak of going into frenzy and lose control. While asking Dushasana to disrobe Draupadi, probably Karna was having his revenge not only on Draupadi but all his anger against the Varna conscious discriminatory establishment was directed towards Draupadi. Karna promises Kunti that he will not kill any of the Pandavas except Arjuna even though he knew that Kunti came to him out of desire of saving the Pandavas. In this he seems to have gone rather overboard. Did he lack emotional control? He is going to war, to fight for Duryodhana with the awareness that he will not kill his mortal enemy Bhima! Again personal glory comes into play and personal sense of chivalry is more important! Was it is a result of hunger for fame that led Karna towards his own destruction as well as the destruction of many others including Duryodhana. Due to the traumatizing experiences of childhood did he lacked normal psychological balance? Karnas sense of honor is also not above question. He tells a lie to Parshurama about his birth to acquire sacred weapon. If he is magnanimous enough to spare the lives of the Pandavas and also to give away his natural armor to Sun God, then why did he stoop so low as to tell a lie about his birth to Parshurama? Probably he believed that Parshurama will not find out! But is it an honorable thing to tell a lie for personal benefit, if you feel that you can escape? Real virtues have intrinsic values and do not entirely depend on the acknowledgement from others. Did his act of excessive charity and chivalry were projections to mask the flaws in his character? Did he develop this flaws due to the peculiar circumstances in which he was born, abandoned and stigmatized throughout the life. Desire to possess a power to either take or spare somebodys life is also indicative of being power hungry.7 Karna was neglected and humiliated by the Varna conscious establishment. Dronacharya do not accept him as pupil and probably Karna remained hungry for the being loved and adored throughout childhood. The neglect and humiliation of early years has a profound influence on his personality and we find him restless. Karna becomes extremely devoted to Duryodhana, as Duryodhana gave him the respect and position in the society. The debt that Karna always carried in his mind! Even though Karna had carried out Digvijaya and conquered many kings for Duryodhana and repaid the debt multifold. He could never come out of the shadow of Duryodhana. He still considered him to be indebted to Duryodhana and finally makes an
7

Ibid

Page 4 of 17

ultimate sacrifice for him. He knew that he was fighting on the wrong side and also he is going to lose. His natural talent of a warrior does not let him remain in the background but the society is not willing to acknowledge him as a warrior of first degree. Karna kills a cow of a Brahmin mistaking it as a wild animal. The epic seem to be turning against Karna. He is cursed by Parshurama and by the Brahimin. He was deprived of his natural armor by the sun God. He was slain when he was helpless. Did the epic send a message that this is what happens to the illegitimate child if he aspires to high position? On the other hand Yvasa and Vidura receive much better treatment. Does it indicate that an illegitimate child of a Brahmin sage can be given better treatment but not of others? The Brahminical influence on the epic is obvious. But Vyasa and Vidura do not have a political ambition. Karnas Rajsik desire of being acknowledged as the greatest archer probably provokes a negative reaction from the society in general and from the ruling establishment in particular. In contrast the society in the epic is more accommodative of Vyasa and Vidura. They are not only the illegitimate children of the sages but they were sagacious too. With the help of Duryodhana, Karna breaks the glass ceiling and becomes the king. His status of Kshatriya (Warrior) is an acquired status and probably it is due to this he seems to be always eager to prove himself as a great warrior and a great donor; both the qualities expected of a Kshatriya. Was it a reaction to the stigmatization? He boasts of being capable of killing Arjuna, in spite of his twice being defeated by Arjuna. He gives away his natural armor, even though he knew that it may cost him his life. Was he seeking glory in death? Had he gone into the mindset that at least after his death people will glorify him as a great warrior and donor! Was it an attempt of washing away the stigma by blood?8 3. Vidura. Out of Niyoga of Vyasa with widowed queens of king Vichitrvirya; Amba and Ambalika, Dhritrashtra and Pandu were born. Dhritrashtra was blind and Pandu was sickly. So Vyasa was summoned one more time and was sent to Amba, so that the Kuru kingdom may have a healthy successor. Amba could not stand the sage one more time and sent her maid instead. Out of the union of the sage and the unknown maid Vidura was born. He was healthy and intelligent, but being born to the maid, he was not considered as a suitable candidate for the
8

Ibid

Page 5 of 17

throne of Hastinapur. The maid belonged to Vichtrvirya, and so Vidura became like an illegitimate child of Vichitrvirya. Though not considered suitable to be a king, he was made minister in the Kuru court. Though he speaks of Dharma; hardly anybody listens to him. Dhritrashtra consults him, when he needs to sooth his troubled mind. But the way Duryodhana orders him to bring Draupadi in the Sabha Parva indicates that he is not taken seriously as a family elder. Dhritrashtra also often scolds him. Even once, badly hurt by the behavior of Dhritrashtra, Vidura leaves the Kuru kingdom and goes to the Pandavas in the forest. But he was called back. Vidura, though humiliated repeatedly, tries to uphold the Dharma and puts forward the legitimate demands of the Pandavas. Did he support them out of his notion of Dharma? Or did he felt the special bounding with them because the legitimacy of the Pandavas as sons of Pandu was also questioned? Vidura and many others, who were apparently illegitimate, do not remain completely illegitimate. If they are talented and useful, they are utilized and some condescending recognition is also given to them. Vidura has accepted his inferior position and do not challenge the establishment. He is not perceived as a threat. He is sometimes listened to, but many times ignored and insulted. But having accepted his inferior position, his life is free from the intense struggle, which we find in the life of Karna. 4. Ghatotkacha and Iravat. Another important illegitimate child in the epic is Ghatotkacha, the half-caste born out of the union of the Pandava prince Bhima and the Rakashasi Hidimba. He was most probably hidden from the public gaze and was utilized to serve the purpose of the Pandavas. He is not called at the time of the Rajsuya Yagya, the important religious ceremony performed by the Pandavas, but he was called to fight the war on the behalf of the Pandavas. He was used as a cannon fodder and sent against Karna to save Arjuna. Ghatotkacha dies and his father Bhima does not say anything. Krishna, who was instrumental in sending Ghatotkacha against Karna, dances with joy that now his beloved friend Arjuna is safe.9 The cunning conquering Aryan race was using the forest dwelling simple people for their benefit. Even they do not have any scruple to use the children in whose vain their own blood also flows, because the half of the blood belongs to those who are considered as others i.e. the Non-Aryan Rakashsas.

Ibid

Page 6 of 17

Mahabharata brings out the selfishness and hypocrisy of the human nature. While in distress we do not hesitate in pretending to love those whom we may not easily acknowledge as our own! Even while dying also Ghatotkacha inflates his body as big as possible and falls on the Kaurava army, so as to kill maximum Kaurava soldier. Through the depiction of the life and treatment given to Ghatotkacha do the epic gives message that this is how the illegitimate child should be treated? He can be used to serve the family of his father and he should do it happily, even while dying he should have welfare of his fathers family at his heart. One can imagine the conditioning that an impressionable mind will get from this! After Ghatotkachas death Krishna says that if Karna had not killed Ghatotkacha, Krishna himself would have killed Ghatotkacha as Ghatotkacha was a sinful soul and inimical to Brahmanas. The accusation is not supported by evidence in the text. On the contrary Ghatotkacha had shown devotion to the Brahmins. During the exile of the Pandavas when Ghatotkacha was remembered by Bhima, he came and shown his reverence to not only to the Pandavas but the accompanying Brahmins as well. (Vana Parva, Section CXLIII). There is no indication of Bhima showing much care for his son born to Rakashashi. Bhima do not play any role in his upbringing, but abandons Hidimba and Ghatotkacha after Ghatotkachas birth. Marrying a Rakashshi, producing a son on her, using him during the time of the crises and then at the same time conspiring against him and sending him in the jaws of death and desiring to kill him if he survives, is obviously a very ignoble act of Krishna and the Pandavas. Bhima also regarded the life of his half-Aryan, half-Rakashasa son as inferior than his purely Aryan brother Arjuna.10 After the death of Ghatotkacha there is no mention of his mother lamenting over his death. She never enters back in the epic after giving birth to the son. Even after the war is over we see lamentation of the widows of the slain warrior, we hear neither about the wives or mother of Ghatotkacha. This indicates that though the Non-Aryan Rakashasa men were used for fighting from both sides, their women were not allowed to mingle with the Aryan women. The trend still prevalent in caste ridden Hindu society! A higher cast wealthy male may have a concubine from the lower caste, but she will not be treated as a respectable wife and neither allowed to attend the family function.

10

Ibid

Page 7 of 17

In contrast the death of Abhimanyu was lamented by all. Grief of Subhhadra was described and Arjuna takes an oath of avenging the death of Abhimanyu. No such treatment for Ghatotkacha. Discrimination in death as well! Abhimanyu was a son of Subhadra, sister of Krishna and Ghatotkacha that of a Non-Aryan Rakashasi. Absence of lamentations and absence of any Rakashasa women crying for their dead husbands and sons indicates the attitude of indifference towards them by the author of the Mahabharata; Vaysa as well as all those who interpolated the text later. Arjuna, the third Pandava prince also had relation with Ulupi, the Naga princess. A son, Iravat was born out of their union. From the description given in the Bhishma Parva, we get some glimpses of the childhood of Iravat. The poet writes, Abandoned by his wicked uncle from hatred of Partha, he grew up in the region of the Nagas, protected by his mother. (Bhishma Parva, Section XCI ) So this child of Arjuna and Ulupi faced discrimination in the Naga kingdom and it was Ulupi alone who shouldered the responsibility of his upbringing. Arjuna also did not feel any necessity to bring his son begotten on the Naga princess to Indraprastha. Only he was called to fight in the war to be used as a cannon fodder.11 So what we can conclude that is the moral values of society go on changing. These changes are reflected in the narration of the Mahabharata. The illegitimate children are part of every society, but usually society tries to sweep them under the carpet and stigmatize them. However there are some who do rise above and make their mark. They negotiate the hurdles and rise high and society is compelled to recognize them. Different illegitimate children receive different treatment in the epic. The response of the children also differs. MODERN INDIA The fact that the Indian society has always considered an illegitimate child to be a sham in the society and having one a taboo, has not changed the fact that the Indian society is changing and developing in a lot of ways. The mindset of the people have changed a lot and so now instead of they thinking in theological terms have now adopted rationality as the new key which could only open the door of a bright Indian future. The various judgments of the apex court in our country regarding cases involving rights to an illegitimate child have not

11

Ibid

Page 8 of 17

only been based on substantial law but also on the basis of humanity and sheer benevolence to that child. In one such case in the year 2011, the Supreme Court of India held that the illegitimate children were not only entitled to a share in the self-acquired property of parents but also in ancestral property. A bench of justices G S Singhvi and A K Ganguly said in a judgement that such children cannot be deprived of their property rights as what was considered illegitimate in the past may not be so in the present changing society. "The court has to remember that relationship between the parents may not be sanctioned by law but the birth of a child in such a relationship has to be viewed independently of the relationship of the parents. "A child born in such a relationship is innocent and is entitled to all the rights which are given to other children born in valid marriage. Right to property is no longer fundamental but it is a constitutional right and Article 300A contains a guarantee against deprivation of property right save by authority of law," the bench said. The bench disagreed with a plethora of earlier decisions taken by the SC in Jinia Keotin and several other cases that illegitimate children were entitled only to a share in the self-acquired property of the parents and nothing beyond that. "In our view, in the case of joint family property, such children will be entitled only to a share in their parents' property but they cannot claim it on their own right. The only limitation even after the amendment seems to be that during the lifetime of their parents, such children cannot ask for partition (of property) but they can exercise this right only after the death of their parents. The bench requested the Chief Justice of India to set up a constitutional bench to examine the issue. "With changing social norms of legitimacy in every society, including ours, what was illegitimate in the past may be legitimate today," the bench said.12 Another article from the same newspaper throws more light in regarding this topic which was written by Dhananjay Mahapatra:

12

This is taken from an article by an anonymous author from a reputed newspaper of the country The Times of India: TNN Apr 3, 2011, 05.02am IST, The Times of India, Illegitimate kids have stake in property

Page 9 of 17

HOW LEGITIMATE IS AN ILLEGITIMATE CHILDS RIGHT TO PROPERTY? The case Rohit Shekhar v. Narayan Dutt Tiwari & Others has stirred up many questions that remain unanswered in the laws governing Hindu social relationships and inheritance when the paternal link of Congress leader ND Tiwari with Rohit Shekhar was proven after a DNA test. One important amendment was carried out in 1976 to Section 16 of the Hindu Marriage Act,
1956, conferring the right of inheritance to father's property on children born out of void or voidable marriages, whether or not so declared by a court of law. But marriage, be it void or voidable, between a man and woman was a pre-condition to bestow right on their progeny, even if illegitimate in the eyes of society, to lay claim over the father's property. The Supreme Court in Jinia Keotin vs Kumar Sitaram Manjhi [2003 (1) SCC 730] said, "Section 16 of the Act, while engrafting a rule of fiction in ordaining children, though illegitimate, to be legitimate, notwithstanding the marriage was void or voidable, chose also to confine its application, so far as succession or inheritance by such children are concerned, to the properties of the parents only." This means, a child born out of a legally invalid marriage could claim right to inherit his father's property alone and not lay inheritance right over ancestral property, which legitimate children could. What happens to children born from live-in relationships, where no marriage has taken place? The Supreme Court had presumed a man and woman to be married despite them only having a live-in relationship if they lived for a very long time under one roof and were known in society as husband and wife.13 In S PS Balasubramanyam vs Sruttayan [AIR 1992 SC 756], the SC had said, "If a man and woman are living under the same roof and cohabiting for a number of years, there will be presumption under Section 114 of the Evidence Act, that they live as husband and wife and the children born to them will not be illegitimate." The crucial pre-conditions for a child born from live-in relationship to be not treated as illegitimate are that the parents must have lived under one roof and co-habited for a considerably

13

D. Mahapatra, TNN Aug 27, 2012, 03.20AM IST, How legitimate is an illegitimate childs right to property?, The Times of India

Page 10 of 17

long time for society to recognize them as husband and wife. It must not be a "walk in and walk out" relationship, as the court pointed out in its 2010 judgment in Madan Mohan Singh vs Rajni Kant. But the court has not yet answered about the right of a child born out of such "walk in and walk out" relationship where a DNA test proves the biological relationship between the child and the father though the mother was in a subsisting legal married relationship with another man. Even if one applies the 1976 amendment to Hindu Marriage Act in the widest possible amplitude, then too the mother of the child must first claim marriage or sufficiently long relationship, without her having access to any other man, for the law to bestow right of inheritance on the offspring to the father's property. However, the law, Section 125 of Criminal Procedure Code, has taken care that no legitimate or illegitimate child is left unattended by the biological father. It says that a man must maintain his legitimate or illegitimate child and casts an obligation on the biological father if his offspring is without any means of sustenance. It is difficult to lay down a law in this regard without causing some social turbulence. Take for example a reverse scenario. A child of a happy marriage grows up and inherits his rich father's property. At that point of time, an outsider turns up and claims that he was the biological father and to prove that demands a DNA test. Should the court order it? If the tests prove positive, proving the indiscretion on the part of the mother, what happens to her happy marriage? What could be the impact on the father, who is robbed of his years of parenthood by a scientific test? And what is the duty of the child towards his biological father with whom he might never have had interacted? Section 125 of CrPC confers a duty on the child to maintain his biological father or mother and it does not absolve a married daughter of this responsibility [Dr Vijay Mohan Arbat vs Kashi Rao Rajaram Sawai 1987 (2) SCC 278].14 To escape all these social complications in an already complex human relationship, the Supreme Court had decided to keep it straight as far as possible after discussing the impact of DNA test results on married couples and their children.

14

Ibid

Page 11 of 17

In Kamti Devi case [2001 (5) SCC 311], the SC said, "The result of a genuine DNA test is said to be scientifically accurate. But even that is not enough to escape from the conclusiveness of Section 112 of the Evidence Act, for example, if a husband and wife were living together during the time of conception but the DNA test revealed that the child was not born to the husband, the conclusiveness of law would remain unrebuttable." "This may look hard from the point of view of the husband who may be compelled to bear the fatherhood of a child of which he may be innocent. But even in such a case, the law leans in favour of the innocent child from being bastardized if his mother and her spouse were living together during the time of conception."15 Hence what can be said is that there is no drastic change in the Indian Society but certainly there are changes that are taking place.

INDIAN LAWS TO PROTECT ILLEGITIMATE CHILDREN

Hindu Law provides that irrespective of the fact that a marriage was null and void under Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, any child born out of such marriage who would have been legitimate, if the marriage had been valid, shall be legitimate whether such a child is born before or after the commencement of the Marriage Laws (Amendment) Act, 1976 and whether or not a decree of nullity is granted, in respect of that marriage under this Act and whether or not the marriage is held to be void otherwise than on a petition under this Act. The children of voidable marriage are legitimate for all purposes unless a decree of annulment is obtained by either of the parties to the marriage. The interest of the children who become illegitimate by virtue of such a decree is safeguarded by an enabling provision 16(2) of Hindu Marriage Act which reads - where a decree of nullity is granted in respect of a voidable marriage under section 12 any child begotten or conceived before the decree is made, who would have been legitimate child of the parties to the marriage if at the date of the decree it had been dissolved instead of being annulled, shall be deemed to be their legitimate child notwithstanding the decree of nullity.16

The aforementioned provisions are enabling provisions and so they cannot be construed so as to confer upon any child of null and void marriage under section 11 any right in or to the property of any person except the parents. It is notable that these provisions do not wash
15 16

Ibid This has been taken from the web link: http://indiankanoon.org/doc/4639/

Page 12 of 17

away the stigma of illegitimacy for all purposes as under the Special Marriage Act, 1954 and the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 such a child is not entitled to inherit the property of any person other than the parents. Besides, nothing has been said about the children who are illegitimate because of being born of void marriage otherwise than under these Acts and also the children born of concubines. Thus confusion exists relating to the distinction between children referred to under these provisions and those who have not been referred to. Under the present legal position legitimate children have been put to serious economic difficulties. Besides, they also have to suffer social degradation and mental torture. If a father commits bigamy and procreates illegitimate children then it may be taken as if he has decided to have his wealth be not for his legitimate children and wife but also for unlawful wife and her children. It is here that an ill feeling takes birth that affects adversely the whole family. Does it not appear that instead of ameliorating the lots of illegitimate children the legislature has created anomalies and hardships for the legitimate children? The Hindu Succession Act enables the legitimate children to succeed to the property of their parents-father and mother but regarding illegitimate children it provides that they can only succeed to the property of their mother only because the word 'related" under section 3(1) (j) means related by legitimate kinship and a proviso attached in section 3(1) (j) says that illegitimate children shall be deemed to be related to their mother and to one another and their descendants shall be deemed to be related to them and to one another. This makes explicit that the Hindu Succession Act does not recognize illegitimate relationship with the father.

Having a glance at the judicial attitude on this point we find that the Bombay High Court in a case observed that since a child of void marriage is illegitimate he is not entitled to succeed to the estate of his father under Hindu Succession Act while in Laxmi bai case the same court held that the child of void marriage is entitled to succeed to the property of his father. It is to be noted that in aforementioned Dadoo Atmaram case section 16 of Hindu Marriage Act was not brought to the attention of the Court and in this case the Court did not consider significance of the expression 'related' in the proviso to section .3(1)(j) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1955.17 Resolving the controversy between the rulings given in these two cases the Division Bench in Shantaram case held that the children of void and annulled voidable marriages are entitled to the property of their father as legitimate children. The Bench observed that legitimacy created

17

Ibid

Page 13 of 17

by section 16 of Hindu Marriage Act must be read into as part of the definition in section (1) (j) of Hindu Succession Act, 1956. Regarding the right of son born out of void marriage, to share the joint family property under Mitakshara law, various Courts in many cases including that of J Sujata v. J Krishna Prasad observed that though the children of void marriages are made legitimate, section 16(3) of Hindu Marriage Act forbids the conferment of any right on them in the property of any person, other than the parents. Therefore, the legitimatized son cannot get a share in the property which belongs to coparcenary of which his father is a member and that the legitimatised son should succeed to the property on the death of his parents. Whereas, in many other cases including Goverdhan Singh v. Hiraman Singh12 and Margbandhu v. K Mandhiri they held, since the son of void marriage is made legitimate, he is entitled to share in the coparcenary property. Finally in the case of Rasal Prakash Rao 14(a) Division Bench of AP High Court ruled that the illegitimate sons of Dwijas are entitled to maintenance only. The illegitimate sons of a Sudra by a permanently kept concubine has status of a son and is a member of the family but his rights are limited as compared to those of a son born into wedlock. He has no right by birth and therefore, he cannot demand partition during his father's lifetime. If a partition is made during father's lifetime he will be allotted a share by father's choice. And in otherwise case, the brother should make him a partaker of the moiety of a share.

Thus under Mitakshara Law an illegitimate son succeeds to the father's estate as a coparcener with the legitimate son with the result that on the death of the father before partition he becomes entitled to the whole estate by survivorship. In case of no legitimate son, the illegitimate son would be entitled to half of his father's estate where there is a widow, daughter or daughter's son of the last male holder and where any one of the three heirs is absent the entire estate of his would devolve on him.18 In essence this decision says that the legitimatised son does not acquire any right by birth in the joint family property even by virtue of section 16 of Hindu Marriage Act. He becomes coparcener with the other legitimate sons after father's death. On partition he shares equally along with other coparceners. The intention of the Legislature is to confer on the legitimatised child a right in or to the property of the father. If the father is in possession of ancestral property the legitimatised son acquires an interest in it by birth and if the father is in

18

Ibid

Page 14 of 17

possession of separate property he succeeds as a class I heir after the death of the father. Just to make the point more clear the legitimatised son becomes a coparcener with his father and he is entitled to share in the joint family property during the lifetime of the father and even if other coparceners are present. Under the English Law contained in the Family Law Reforms Act, 1987 the illegitimate children enjoy full rights of succession. The illegitimate children must be given right equal to other children because it is the law itself which has categorized them as illegitimate and legitimate. The children have done no wrong. They should not be punished by curtailing their right for no fault on their part.

As regards Muslim Law, it does not recognise any process by which status of legitimacy may be conferred on an illegitimate child. However, the traditional Muslim law provides for the acknowledgement of legitimacy but the idea behind it is not always to legitimate the child but it is from a different perspective. A Muslim marriage needs no religious formalities for its constitution. It may be performed only by observing some secular formalities so the cases regarding doubts in the validity of Muslim marriage are comparatively higher. With the result legitimacy of the children born out of such marriage is generally doubted. It is only because of this fact that Muslim law enables a father to acknowledge the paternity of a son under certain legal situations. It may be noted that under Muslim law a child to be legitimate must have been an offspring of a man and his wife or a man and his slave. Rest all the children are treated to be illegitimate. They are off springs of Zena, that means illicit connections. The acknowledgement must not be merely of sonship but must be made in such a way that it shows that the acknowledgement meant to accept the other, not only as his son but as his legitimate son. In other words under Muslim law only legitimate sons can be subjected to acknowledgement and there is no rule which may confer the status of legitimacy upon an approved illegitimate son. In our country an illegitimate child cannot inherit to his father, even if the genetic father is known. As a matter of fact a father cannot cease to be a father only because of being not lawfully married to the mother of the child. It is rather unjust and unreasonable to deprive a child of the right to inherit the property of his generator or procreator in case a person is known. Barring provision of Evidence Act as contained in section 112 providing that a child born to married woman having access to her husband shall be conclusively presumed to be the child of the husband, in other cases it does not appear reasonable as to why an illegitimate child shall not inherit the property of its genetic father.19

19

Ibid

Page 15 of 17

CONCLUSION
The Indian Society is a metaphysical society and so, it is going through a transformation stage which consists of two broad categories of people with two distinct ideologies. One of the groups believes in the orthodox methods of Hindu religion where having an illegitimate child is a taboo and being one is a bigger stigma. They believe in purity of life and the practice of chastity. The other group in the society consists of people who are rational and liberal in their outlook and do not consider illegitimacy as a stigma. They do not blame an illegitimate child for his/her existence instead blames the irresponsible couple. The laws in the society are also being amended accordingly as the time and the situation demands. Therefore what we can say is that the Indian Laws are the mirror image of the Indian Society.

Page 16 of 17

REFERENCES
Books: Dr. U. P. D. Kesari, Modern Hindu Law, Central Law Publications S.A. Desai, Mulla Hindu Law, Vol. 1, LexisNexis Butterworths Wadhwa, Nagpur

Websites: http://indiankanoon.org/doc/4639/ (Visited on 29th October 2013) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legitimacy_(law) (Visited on 29th October 2013) http://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.edu.documents/31258460/Illegitimate_children_i n_the_Hindu_Society.docx?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAI5BFST3KI667TFIQ&Expires =1383292693&Signature=EKPmbEBhZMWhYrhYD06W8JoNdmI%3D (Visited on 28th October 2013)

Newspaper Articles:

Anonymous, TNN Apr 3, 2011, 05.02am IST, The Times of India, Illegitimate kids have stake in property D. Mahapatra, TNN Aug 27, 2012, 03.20AM IST, How legitimate is an illegitimate childs
right to property?, The Times of India

Page 17 of 17