Under Hindu law, while anciently an illegitimate child was not an alien to his kin as under Common law, the position under the codified Hindu law stood altered, likely as a consequence of the English influence during the colonization of India. This paper, critiquing the treatment of illegitimate children under Hindu law traces the historical link between legitimacy and marriage, and its legal and sociological basis. This link has been perpetrated across societies, over time, and through legal and moral media, and has also been justified by sociologists as a means to preserve the society, by preserving its fundamental constituent – a normative family. The Indian State machinery (courts, the government and the legislature) too suffers from an anxiety to protect the normative family (barring notable exceptions), and has been dismissive of any alternative, notwithstanding that the rights of illegitimate children is the collateral damage. Regardless, today this distinction contravenes the constitutional safeguards in India. More importantly, with the acceptance of novel reproductive techniques (such as artificial insemination), and familial setups (same-sex relationships), the sociological basis for the preservation of this distinction has become irrelevant. Accordingly, this paper argues for this distinction to be removed from the statutes, which would benefit all the three stakeholders relevant to the illegitimacy equation, namely, the unwed father, the mother, and the child.

中文翻译：

---

印度教法律下的非法行为：放弃的案例

根据印度教法律，虽然在古代，私生子不像普通法那样对其亲属来说是外星人，但在成文的印度教法律下的地位却发生了变化，这可能是由于英国在印度殖民期间的影响。本文批判了印度教法律下对非婚生子女的待遇，追溯了合法性与婚姻之间的历史联系，及其法律和社会学基础。随着时间的推移，这种联系通过法律和道德媒体在各个社会中实施，并且也被社会学家证明是保护社会的一种手段，通过保护其基本组成部分——一个规范的家庭。印度的国家机器（法院、政府和立法机关）也因保护规范家庭而焦虑（除非有明显的例外），并且对任何替代方案不屑一顾，尽管非婚生子女的权利是附带损害。无论如何，今天这种区别违反了印度的宪法保障。更重要的是，随着新的生殖技术（如人工授精）和家庭设置（同性关系）的接受，保持这种区别的社会学基础变得无关紧要。因此，本文主张从法规中删除这种区别，这将有利于与非婚生等式相关的所有三个利益相关者，即未婚父亲、母亲和孩子。更重要的是，随着新的生殖技术（如人工授精）和家庭设置（同性关系）的接受，保持这种区别的社会学基础变得无关紧要。因此，本文主张从法规中删除这种区别，这将有利于与非婚生等式相关的所有三个利益相关者，即未婚父亲、母亲和孩子。更重要的是，随着新的生殖技术（如人工授精）和家庭设置（同性关系）的接受，保持这种区别的社会学基础变得无关紧要。因此，本文主张从法规中删除这种区别，这将有利于与非婚生等式相关的所有三个利益相关者，即未婚父亲、母亲和孩子。