The Supreme Court of India held that since a mother is the only natural guardian of the child after the death of its biological father, the right to select the surname for the child remains with her. The bench consisting of justices Dinesh Maheshwari and Krishna Murari said that since the mother is the natural guardian, she can choose if she wants to get the child adopted, in case she is unable to take care of it.
“After the demise of her first husband, being the only natural guardian of the child we fail to see how the mother can be lawfully restrained from including the child in her new family and deciding the surname of the child,” the SC bench said. “A surname refers to the name a person shares with other members of that person’s family, distinguished from that person’s given name or names; a family name,” the bench added.
Supreme Court pointed out that surname should not be limited to lineage but the role it plays in social reality for the children. “Homogeneity of surname emerges as a mode to create, sustain and display ‘family’,” the top court said.
This was while deciding in the case between a woman and her parents-in-law, who had a problem with the surname that was given to their grandchild. The woman’s husband had passed away, and she is the natural guardian of the child. Hence, it is in her legal right to decide what surname the child should have.
“A name is important as a child derives his identity from it and a difference in name from his family would act as a constant reminder of the factum of adoption and expose the child to unnecessary questions hindering a smooth, natural relationship between him and his parents. We, therefore, see nothing unusual in Appellant mother, upon remarriage having given the child the surname of her husband or even giving the child in adoption to her husband,” the bench said.