DNA test has to be ordered in accordance with law, not as a matter of course: Karnataka HC

In the original case, a civil judge in Channapatna district allowed a DNA test after the petitioner’s brothers sought it in the context of a partition suit.

The petitioner’s counsel argued that the parents had been married with several children and that such an application for a DNA test could not be filed, as it would violate his fundamental rights. As per the Evidence Act, the brothers would have to have proved non-access between the parents, the counsel further argued, adding that no plea had been made to prove this.

The opposing counsel representing the brothers said that their father had undergone a vasectomy seven years before the petitioner’s birth in 1986 and that he could therefore not be their father’s son.

The bench added that demonstrable non-access between the parents had to be pleaded and proved. Non-access means the absence of opportunity for sexual intercourse.

Against the earlier order granting a DNA test, the bench stated, “There was no imminent need for conducting a DNA test; the order ignores the purport of Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act, and presumption of paternity is given a go-bye. No material is placed before the Court depicting non-access at the time of birth. In the absence of any pleading of the kind, the concerned Court has treated the DNA test as a frolicsome act and ordered as a matter of course. Right to privacy and dignity is lost sight of.”

The high court thus quashed the earlier order allowing a DNA test.

From the homepage

Why Karnataka is wary of the GST slabs in the Centre’s rate rationalisation proposal

Watch LIVE: Express Adda with Chief Economic Advisor V Anantha Nageswaran

Don’t drag my name into your family crisis, BRS an expired currency note: Revanth to Kavitha