Supreme Court rules DNA testing cannot be ordered as matter of course - sets aside High Court's direction for DNA testing. Court emphasizes conclusive presumption of legitimacy under Section 112 Evidence Act and right to privacy.
CAN A COURT ORDER DNA TESTING TO DETERMINE PATERNITY WHEN A CHILD WAS BORN DURING A VALID MARRIAGE AND THE PRESUMPTION OF LEGITIMACY UNDER SECTION 112 OF THE EVIDENCE ACT HAS NOT BEEN REBUTTED?
NO, DNA TESTING CANNOT BE ORDERED WITHOUT FIRST REBUTTING THE PRESUMPTION OF LEGITIMACY. The Supreme Court has ruled that the statutory presumption under Section 112 of the Evidence Act operates as conclusive proof of legitimacy of a child born during the subsistence of a valid marriage. This presumption can only be displaced by proving "non-access" between the spouses during the relevant period. DNA testing cannot be ordered as a matter of course and constitutes a significant intrusion into the privacy and dignity of individuals.
Child Born: Child born to respondent No.1 during subsistence of her valid marriage with Abdul Latheef
FIR Registered: FIR No.233/2014 registered against appellant for offences under Sections 417, 420 IPC and Tamil Nadu Women Harassment Act
First DNA Order: High Court directs DNA testing in interim order, later set aside by Division Bench
Fresh DNA Order: Single Judge directs DNA profiling after fresh consideration
Division Bench Approval: Division Bench dismisses writ appeal, upholds DNA testing direction
Supreme Court Justice: Supreme Court sets aside DNA testing order, protects presumption of legitimacy and privacy rights
| Legal Argument | Basis in Law | Application in Your Case |
|---|---|---|
| Conclusive Presumption | Section 112 Evidence Act | Child born during marriage presumed legitimate unless non-access proven |
| Privacy Rights | Article 21 Constitution, K.S. Puttaswamy case | DNA testing constitutes grave intrusion into bodily autonomy and privacy |
| DNA Testing Standards | Goutam Kundu, Bhabani Prasad Jena cases | DNA testing cannot be ordered as matter of course or for fishing inquiries |
| Child's Best Interests | Juvenile Justice principles | DNA testing can cause psychological harm and social stigma to child |
Statutory provision creating conclusive presumption that child born during valid marriage is legitimate, unless proven that parties had no access to each other.
Legal term meaning impossibility of sexual relations between spouses during relevant period, not merely absence of cohabitation.
Evidence declared by law to be conclusive - court must regard fact as proved and cannot allow evidence to disprove it.
Legal proceeding initiated without sufficient evidence, hoping to discover something actionable.
Legal standard requiring compelling necessity for intrusive procedures like DNA testing.
"The presumption under Section 112 of the Evidence Act operates as 'Conclusive Proof' of the legitimacy of a child born during the subsistence of a valid marriage... This presumption endures unless it is affirmatively established, by strong and unambiguous evidence, that the parties to the marriage had no access to each other at any time when the child could have been begotten."
This landmark judgment reinforces the sanctity of the presumption of legitimacy under Section 112 of the Evidence Act and establishes strong protections against unwarranted DNA testing. The Supreme Court emphasized that DNA testing constitutes a grave intrusion into privacy and personal liberty, and can only be ordered in exceptional circumstances after careful balancing of interests.
The Court clarified that mere allegations of extramarital relations or simultaneous access do not rebut the presumption of legitimacy. The burden is on the person challenging legitimacy to prove "non-access" - meaning the impossibility of sexual relations between the spouses during the relevant period, not merely the absence of cohabitation.
This judgment harmonizes the constitutional right to privacy with the statutory presumption of legitimacy, ensuring that children are not casually illegitimized based on unsubstantiated allegations or mere suspicion. It establishes that scientific procedures, however advanced, cannot be employed as instruments of speculation and must be anchored in demonstrable relevance to the legal issues at hand.
This content is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified legal professional for specific legal guidance. The information provided is based on judicial interpretation and may be subject to changes in law.
Making Supreme Court judgments accessible and actionable for every Indian citizen navigating legal challenges.
This roadmap decodes a complex family and criminal law judgment to help individuals understand their rights against unwarranted DNA testing. It empowers them to protect the presumption of legitimacy of children and their constitutional right to privacy against intrusive investigative procedures.