Case Note & Summary
The case involves two writ petitions filed by Mrs. Shruti Sood alias Shruti Banerji, the widow of Late Amit Banerji, against her mother-in-law Mrs. Sarita Banerji and sister-in-law Mrs. Preeti Banerji Chopra. The dispute pertains to the genuineness of a Will allegedly executed by Late Amit Banerji. The petitioner claimed that the Will was forged and filed an application (IA No. V) in the trial court (G and WC No. 15010 of 2025) seeking a DNA test of the testator to ascertain the authenticity of the Will. The trial court, by order dated 12.01.2026, dismissed the application. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed WP No. 5971 of 2026 under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to quash that order and allow the application. WP No. 4443 of 2026 was filed challenging a common order dated 12.01.2026 passed in the same proceedings. The High Court heard both petitions together. The court noted that the petitioner had specifically pleaded that the Will was forged and that DNA profiling would help establish the truth. The respondents opposed the application, arguing that it was not maintainable. The High Court, relying on Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, held that DNA profiling is a relevant scientific evidence to determine the genuineness of a document when its execution is disputed. The court observed that the trial court had erred in dismissing the application without considering its merits. Consequently, the High Court allowed both writ petitions, set aside the impugned order dated 12.01.2026, and directed the trial court to allow IA No. V and order DNA profiling of the testator. The court also directed the trial court to expedite the proceedings.
Headnote
A) Succession - Will - DNA Test - Section 45 Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 63 Indian Succession Act, 1925 - The petitioner, widow of the testator, sought DNA profiling of the testator to prove that the Will propounded by the respondents was forged. The trial court dismissed the application. The High Court held that when execution of a Will is disputed on grounds of forgery or fraud, DNA profiling of the testator may be ordered to ascertain genuineness, as it is a relevant fact under Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. The court set aside the impugned order and allowed the application. (Paras 1-10) B) Civil Procedure - Interim Application - Order 18 Rule 17 CPC - Section 151 CPC - The trial court dismissed IA No. V filed by the petitioner for DNA test, holding that it was not maintainable. The High Court held that the application was maintainable and that the trial court had erred in dismissing it without considering the merits. (Paras 5-8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the trial court erred in dismissing the application for DNA test of the testator to determine the genuineness of the Will, and whether such application is maintainable under Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
Final Decision
Both writ petitions are allowed. The impugned common order dated 12.01.2026 passed by the learned V Addl. District Judge, Bengaluru Rural District at Devanahalli in G and WC No. 15010 of 2025 is set aside. IA No. V filed by the petitioner is allowed. The trial court is directed to order DNA profiling of the testator Late Amit Banerji and expedite the proceedings.
Law Points
- Succession
- Will
- DNA Test
- Section 45 Indian Evidence Act
- 1872
- Article 227 Constitution of India
- Order 18 Rule 17 CPC
- Section 151 CPC
- Section 63 Indian Succession Act
- 1925
