Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Chaturbhuj Pradhan (CP), was aggrieved by concurrent orders of the First Additional Civil Judge, Class-II, Basna and the High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur directing him to undergo a DNA test to determine the paternity of the first respondent, Amar Pradhan. Amar claimed to be the son of CP born on 10th September 1999 as a result of consensual relations between his mother (the second respondent) and CP in January 1999. CP denied this, relying on his acquittal in a case registered by the second respondent under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Sessions Case No. 268/1999, acquitted on 31st December 1999). There was prior litigation regarding maintenance, including Misc.Crl.Case No.113 of 2005 where the High Court observed that Amar and his mother had failed to establish any relationship with CP. That order was challenged in Criminal Appeal No. 789 of 2011 before the Supreme Court, which was disposed of in Lok Adalat on 31st July 2024 with the observation that Amar had attained majority and nothing survived. During the pendency of that appeal, Amar filed a civil suit seeking a declaration that he is the son of CP. The trial court ordered a DNA test, which was upheld by the High Court. The Supreme Court granted leave and dismissed the appeal, holding that the DNA test was necessary to ascertain the truth and did not violate the right to privacy. The court emphasized that the acquittal in the rape case did not preclude the civil suit, and the presumption of legitimacy under Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 could be rebutted by DNA evidence. The appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - DNA Test - Paternity Declaration - Order for DNA test in a civil suit for declaration of paternity does not violate right to privacy - The court held that when there is a dispute regarding paternity and the child seeks declaration of status, a DNA test is a scientific method to ascertain the truth and is in the interest of justice. The right to privacy is not absolute and must yield to the need for truth in such cases. (Paras 2-9) B) Evidence Act - DNA Test - Paternity - Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Presumption of legitimacy - The court noted that the presumption under Section 112 can be rebutted by DNA evidence, and in this case, the appellant's acquittal in a rape case does not bar the civil suit for declaration of paternity. (Paras 3-8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a person can be compelled to undergo a DNA test to determine paternity in a civil suit for declaration of status, and whether such an order violates the right to privacy.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the orders of the courts below directing the appellant to undergo a DNA test. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- DNA test
- paternity
- right to privacy
- civil suit
- declaration of status
- Section 376 IPC
- Indian Penal Code
- 1860
