Upgrad LLM

is this legal - surname change

I got married a decade ago. We are both hindus. Promptly, I got my marriage certificate. Based on the marriage certificate, I got my surname changed in my Pan card & passport. All my accounts have also been changed.  My identity is with my married surname, now.

After all these years with no problems, I was confused when someone told me I had to get a court order.  Is this process of  identity change (i.e. to married surname) legal? Do I have to necessarily get a court order or publish my name on the gazzette for this surname change due to marriage?

Any clarifications on this would be appreciated...



Pls follow the procedure mentioned in the following link :-




But this is surname change due to marriage. And the central government has accepted the marriage certificate and issued me the changed pan card and passport. Does this not mean that the change of surname due to marriage is leagl and valid?


PAN Card is issued on the details submitted by you, it dosen't mean that the no other procedure will have to be followed.

Legal Advisor

You are advised hereby there is no need to get court order. Marriage certificate has been issued to you,it is sufficient.



Caste atrocity case filed against in-laws

Shibu Thomas | TNN 

Mumbai: Can a woman born into what is called a ‘lower caste’ and who marries an upper-caste man file a case against her husband and in-laws under the Special Atrocities Act? A full bench of the Bombay High Court will now decide on the vexed issue. 

    The matter was placed before a larger bench following differing views of two different benches of the HC. The case before the HC concerned a complaint filed by a woman belonging to the scheduled caste, who married Rajendra Shrivastava (from the Kayastha caste) in 1991. 

    She filed a case against her husband and in-laws last year at the Nehru Nagar police station for treating her cruelly and also invoked the Atroci
ties Act. She claimed that her husband 

and her in-laws “from time to time, abused her in filthy 
language in the name of her caste”. 

    The matter came to court after the Shrivastavas moved the high court seeking anticipatory bail. One bench of the court granted anticipatory bail to Shirvastava’s brother and sister ruling that the provi
sions of the special law could not be invoked. But during the hearing of his own application before another court, Justice Dilip Bhosale disagreed and referred the case to a full bench. 

    Shrivastava’s lawyers argued that 
following her marriage, her caste merged with that of her husband’s Kayastha caste. Consequently, special laws like the Atrocities Act and Civil Rights Act — meant for the protection of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes — could not be invoked by her. 

    Additional public prosecutor Sangeeta Shinde referred to 
judgements of the Supreme Court and argued that a woman acquired caste by birth and not by marriage. So, if after marriage of a woman originally belonging to a scheduled caste was abused in the name of her caste, the provisions of the Atrocities Act should be applicable. 

    Justice D B Bhosale, while referring the matter to a full bench of the high court, had observed: “The recognition of a lady as a member of forward class in view of her marriage would be relevant as long as she is treated as a member of the caste to which she has moved.” 

    “But, if she is treated as a member of backward community by a member of the public or her husband or her relatives by their conduct or treatment and if they abuse her in the name of her caste which she has acquired by birth, then — in my opinion — there is no legal impediment in registering an offence under the provisions of the Atrocities Act and/or the Civil Rights Act,” he added.


Dear, no need to get the court order

Subhash kumar, adv




Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  


  Search Forum



CrPC MASTERCLASS!     |    x