The Supreme Court on April 21 held that once an uncontested DNA test proves a man is not the father, he cannot be made liable for child's maintenance even if the child was born during marriage.
A Bench comprising of Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice N Kotiswar Singh dismissed an appeal filed by a mother challenging a Delhi High Court ruling which had refused maintenance for her daughter from the husband, the alleged father.
“In this case the DNA test has been conducted, the appellant consented to the same and has, not even once disputed the conclusion thereof. It has, in other words attained finality... we are of the considered view that no error could be pointed out by the appellant in the High Court’s decision denying the grant of maintenance to her daughter. The appeal is bereft of merit and, therefore, dismissed,” said the Court.
The case arose from a domestic violence complaint filed by the woman under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, seeking interim maintenance, protection orders and return of her belongings.
She had alleged that the man, in whose house she worked as a domestic help, had entered into a relationship with her on the pretext of marriage, following which they got married and a child was born shortly thereafter.
During proceedings, the husband denied paternity and sought a DNA test. The trial court had allowed the request and the test report concluded that he was not the biological father.
Relying on this, the trial court had rejected the claim for maintenance, a decision later affirmed by the appellate court.
Before the Delhi High Court, the woman argued that under Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, a child born during a valid marriage is presumed to be legitimate.
However, the High Court observed that once a DNA report conclusively establishes that the man is not the biological father, the usual legal presumption in favour of the child would not apply in such a situation.
It ultimately denied maintenance to the child but remanded the issue of the mother’s maintenance for fresh consideration.
The Supreme Court examined how the law has evolved on balancing legal presumptions with scientific evidence. It noted that while courts are usually cautious about ordering DNA tests to avoid stigma for children, once a valid test has been done and its findings are not challenged, they cannot be ignored.
The Court further observed that earlier rulings have sought to balance the protection of a child’s legitimacy with the need to arrive at the truth through scientific means.
In the present case however, it noted, the DNA test had attained finality and therefore, the principle that scientific evidence may override legal presumption squarely applied.
At the same time, the Court expressed concern about the welfare of the child, noting that the dispute over parentage had reached the highest court.
"Even though the High Court has correctly remanded the matter of the appellant’s maintenance to be decided afresh by the Trial Court, we acknowledge that even if a revised amount is awarded as per law, the difficulties for the child will persist," noted the Court.
It directed the Delhi government’s Women and Child Development Department to assess the child’s living conditions, including education, nutrition and health, and to take remedial measures if necessary.
[Read Order]