ISSUE
Whether the Petitioner was entitled to change his name and gender in his birth certificate which was wrongly assigned at birth because he was intersex?
FACTS
Mulla Faizal was assigned and recorded as female at birth despite having intersex characteristics. As an adult, he had developed more male characteristics and obtained medical and psychological certificates confirming his gender as male. Additionally, Mulla Faizal also underwent surgical procedures to align himself with the male gender. When he approached the District Registrar to change his name & gender on his birth certificate, his application was rejected. Faizal filed a civil suit against the Registrar, which was dismissed by a single judge. He then filed an appeal before the High Court of Gujarat.
DECISION & REASONING
Faizal argued that this was not a case pertaining to ‘transsexualism’. He claimed that he had been registered as a female at birth due to certain ‘deformities’. On this basis, he argued that his request for name and gender change should be accepted.
The District Registrar argued that under Section 15 of The Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969 (‘the Act’), changes are only allowed in case of erroneous entries. Faizal argued that recording his gender as female at birth was erroneous since he displayed intersex characteristics at the time of birth. The court agreed and noted that Section 15 of the Act read with Rule 12 of the Gujarat Registration of Births and Deaths Rules, 1973 placed an obligation of the Registrar to make any necessary changes in order to correct an erroneous entry. It directed the Registrar to make necessary inquiries and seek medical opinion and consequently make the requested change. Thus, the court set aside the lower court order and allowed the appeal.
SIGNIFICANCE
This case was one of the first times a court placed an obligation to change name and gender on birth certificates for intersex persons. It also acknowlegded the distinction between intersex persons and transgender persons. However, it is crucial to note that this case preceded NALSA v. Union of India, where the Supreme Court recognised the right of all individuals to self-identify their gender.