The Madhya Pradesh High Court has ruled that a DNA test may be ordered in divorce proceedings where the objective is to prove alleged adultery and not to question a child’s legitimacy. The Court emphasized sufficient pleadings of non-access and the need to balance privacy with justice.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
MADHYA PRADESH: The Madhya Pradesh High Court recently upheld a Family Court’s order allowing a husband to conduct a DNA test on his child to establish whether he is the biological father. The court held that DNA testing may be permitted in appropriate cases of adultery, even when it involves a child born during wedlock, provided that legitimacy is not the main issue and sufficient pleadings of non-access are present.
Background of the Case
The case involves a husband serving in the Indian Army and his wife, a constable in the Madhya Pradesh Police. The husband filed a divorce petition on the grounds of adultery and alleged that the child born during the marriage may not be his biological daughter.
He claimed that he was posted away from home and visited his wife only once every 3–6 months, making it impossible for him to have access to her during the time of conception.
Allegations by the Husband:
- The husband was summoned home in October 2015.
- Within four days, the wife informed him she was pregnant.
- The child was born within eight months, which raised suspicion.
- The husband argued that the wife could not have known about her pregnancy within four days.
- The husband alleged non-access and claimed the wife had intentionally misled him.
Wife’s Argument
The wife argued that ordering a DNA test would violate the right to privacy, the child’s identity and dignity and presumption of legitimacy under Section 112 of the Evidence Act
She also argued that DNA testing would create unnecessary stigma and harm the child’s mental well-being.
High Court’s Reasoning
The High Court examined multiple landmark judgments, including:
- Dipanwita Roy v. Ronobroto Roy (2015)
- Aparna Ajinkya Firodia v. Ajinkya Arun Firodia (2024)
- Ivan Rathinam v. Milan Joseph (2025)
- R. Rajendran v. Kamar Nisha (2025)
The Court emphasized:
“DNA tests can be ordered in adultery cases where the main issue is infidelity, not the legitimacy of the child.”
The Court also stated that:
“The presumption of legitimacy under Section 112 is strong and cannot be easily rebutted.”
However, it added that if non-access is sufficiently pleaded, and there is an eminent need, DNA testing may be permitted.
Section 112 states, “Birth during marriage, conclusive proof of legitimacy.”
This means a child born during marriage is presumed to be legitimate unless it can be shown that the parties had no access to each other.
The Supreme Court in Ivan Rathinam v. Milan Joseph (2025) emphasized:
“The courts must balance the interests of those involved and must consider whether it is possible to reach the truth without the use of such a test.”
The Court added:
“There are thus, two blockades to ordering a DNA test: (i) insufficiency of evidence; and (ii) a positive finding regarding the balance of interests.”
The High Court observed that the husband’s divorce petition contained clear pleadings of non-access, making it a fit case for DNA testing. The court also noted:
- This is the third divorce petition between the parties.
- The first petition was withdrawn due to a promise of mutual consent.
- The second petition was closed due to the wife’s non-appearance.
Therefore, the Court concluded that the Family Court did not err in ordering DNA testing.
The High Court dismissed the wife’s petition and upheld the Family Court’s order allowing DNA testing.
It further stated that if the wife refuses to provide DNA samples, the Family Court may draw adverse presumptions under Section 114(h) of the Indian Evidence Act or corresponding provisions of Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023.
“In case the petitioner still refuses to part with DNA samples, then the Family Court would be at liberty to draw presumption under Section 114(h)…”
Case Title:
KAMLA PATEL Versus GOVIND BAHADUR
MISC. PETITION No. 5428 of 2023
READ ORDER
Click Here to Read Our Reports on DNA
Click Here to Read Our Reports on Right of Privacy