Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Madanaiah Durgam Chinna Kande, challenged the order of the Additional Sessions Judge, Chandrapur, dated 16th November 2021, which quashed the Magistrate's order directing a DNA test. The respondent, a minor through his mother, had filed a maintenance application under Section 125 CrPC claiming the petitioner is his father. The petitioner denied paternity. The Magistrate allowed the application for DNA test, finding prima facie evidence of marriage and cohabitation. The revisional court set aside this order, holding that DNA test cannot be directed in maintenance proceedings. The High Court allowed the writ petition, restoring the Magistrate's order. It held that the revisional court exceeded its jurisdiction by interfering with a discretionary order that was based on prima facie evidence. The court emphasized that DNA test is permissible in maintenance cases to determine paternity when there is sufficient material to support the claim of marriage and cohabitation. The High Court set aside the revisional order and directed the parties to undergo DNA test as per the Magistrate's direction.
Headnote
A) Family Law - Maintenance - Paternity - DNA Test - Section 125 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - The court considered whether a DNA test can be directed in maintenance proceedings when paternity is disputed. Held that where there is prima facie evidence of marriage and cohabitation, the court may order a DNA test to determine paternity, but such order must be based on proper application of mind and not be arbitrary. (Paras 2-10) B) Criminal Procedure - Revision - Interference with Discretionary Order - Sections 397, 401 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - The revisional court's power to interfere with a Magistrate's discretionary order is limited. Held that the revisional court should not substitute its own view unless the order is perverse, illegal, or suffers from material irregularity. (Paras 11-15) C) Evidence - DNA Test - Prima Facie Case - Section 125 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - The court examined the requirement of prima facie evidence before ordering a DNA test. Held that the Magistrate had correctly found prima facie evidence of marriage and cohabitation, and the revisional court erred in quashing the order without considering this evidence. (Paras 16-20)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the revisional court was justified in quashing the Magistrate's order directing DNA test of the petitioner and respondent in a maintenance application under Section 125 CrPC, without considering the prima facie evidence of marriage and cohabitation.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the revisional order dated 16.11.2021, and restored the Magistrate's order dated 26.03.2021 directing the parties to undergo DNA test.
Law Points
- DNA test
- paternity
- maintenance
- Section 125 CrPC
- prima facie evidence
- marriage
- cohabitation
- revisional jurisdiction
- interference with discretionary order
