The Orissa High Court has upheld an order of lower court declining the DNA test of a man observing that “directing for DNA test of the child on the face of admission of the mother would be an insult to her motherhood and against the law enumerated in section 112 of the Evidence Act”.
File Photo: Orissa High Court
The Orissa High Court has upheld an order of lower court declining the DNA test of a man observing that “directing for DNA test of the child on the face of admission of the mother would be an insult to her motherhood and against the law enumerated in section 112 of the Evidence Act”.
It is to be borne in mind that forcing a person to undergo DNA test affects his right to privacy, the Single Bench Judge Justice B.P.Routray stated while dismissing the Civil Miscellaneous Petition.
Advertisement
The litigation arose over the partition suit of property of a joint family with a prayer for DNA test to determine parentage of rival party. The Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kuchinda had turned down the prayer.
Advertisement
Apart from this, it is inconceivable how the DNA test would be relevant in a case of partition where the status of the parties as the members of joint family is required to be seen to determine their respective shares, Justice Routray ruled in the judgment.
It is important to be reminded here that recognition of a person as son of another is not required to be determined through blood relation only and what is important is his recognition in the society as such. The defendant is at the age 58 years now. So the trial court has rightly observed that direction for DNA test at this stage would not bring any fruitful result, the Single Bench concluded.
Advertisement
