Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
In a very interesting judgment, the Rajasthan High Court decided that a DNA test to determine the paternity should be ordered very carefully by the Court. All circumstances should be looked at before granting the order for the paternity test. However the Court agreed that, application for seeking DNA test cannot be ousted merely because of presumption to be drawn under Section 112 of the Evidence Act.
This petition started when petitioner husband had challenged the order of a Civil Judge, rejecting his application for demanding DNA test to be conducted of the son born to his wife on the ground that, the son born to his wife was not his. The respondent, i.e. the wife contended that, petitioner had caused her great physical and mental harassment and the application contains false averments. She also submitted that, he can get DNA test done and she does not have any objection on that issue. The Trial Court rejected the application for the DNA test, as the couple were living as husband as wife, child born from his wife would be presumed to be his son in terms of Sec.112 of the Indian Evidence and there is no reason to call for DNA test of child. Many cases were used as precedent,a direction for DNA testing can be issued only after the test of eminent need is satisfied. An observation was also made between the terms, right to privacy and ascertainment of truth. Another observation made by the Court was that the paternity test may bring up the question of the legitimacy of the child though his mother and her spouse were living together during the time of conception.
Keeping in mind the present case, it was decided that the DNA test cannot be allowed in the present time, when the Petitioner is yet to prove this contentions. Also, the petitioner has not even proved its authenticity in the court. Unlike other countries, India doesn’t have a legislation which deals with the issues relating to the paternity test. However, for an application certain guidelines have been laid down, which the Court will have to keep in mind. Firstly, the petitioner has not even proved its authenticity in the court. Secondly,whether such test would result in harming the status of the minor in any form, thirdly and lastly, the report is not to be made public.
86540
103860
630
114
59824