Out of wedlock in legal term

It's general statement made in the petition that children are born out of wedlock, nothing special or extraordinary in this statement. No interpretation can be assumed that if she denies it it will mean that the children were born from relationship with other person other than the husband. It is usually admitted fact by respondent that the children are born to the parties out of wedlock. No hue cry needed to be made out of the statement.

The statement is the correct terminology. People with less experience or less understanding legal knowledge will debate this. I hope this clarifies.

 

1. From standpoint of english language you are correct. "Out of wedlock" means children born to parents who are not legally married. I am also surprised by opposite use of this idiom in Indian courts, especially because this has a derogatory connotation.
2. I agree with experts that for some historical reason this idiom has become very common in Indian family law to mean "children born from marriage". Judges and lawyers around the country have come to accept this usage. 

It is accepted form of saying that the children are born legitimately to both husband and his wife.  Here out of the wedlock , does not mean outside the wedlock, but because of their marriage with each other.   Legal English is sometime different from English as a language