R. Rajendran vs Kamar Nisha and Others
Background
Respondent No.1, married to one Abdul Latheef, approached the appellant, a doctor, for her husband's treatment. She alleged the appellant instead developed a physical relationship with her, resulting in the birth of a child in 2007, and that he later refused to take responsibility, prompting a belated criminal complaint in 2014 for cheating and related offences. In the resulting criminal case, the Madras High Court had directed the appellant to undergo DNA testing to establish the child's paternity, invoking its powers of medical examination under the CrPC. The appellant challenged this direction before the Supreme Court, arguing it clashed with the statutory presumption of legitimacy and violated his privacy and bodily autonomy.
Decision Breakdown
The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's order directing DNA testing. It held that Section 112 of the Evidence Act creates a strong presumption that a child born during a subsisting valid marriage is the legitimate child of that marriage: a presumption the birth, school, and admission records (all naming the husband as father) reinforced, and one not lightly displaced by mere allegations. The Court found no genuine evidentiary nexus between the offences alleged (cheating and related charges) and any need for DNA analysis, holding that the medical-examination provisions of the CrPC apply only where such examination would directly yield evidence of the offence charged. Compelling DNA testing without such necessity, the Court held, would improperly convert an investigative tool into an intrusive measure infringing bodily autonomy and privacy, and could unjustifiably cast doubt on a child's legitimacy on the basis of unsubstantiated allegations.
Lesson Learnt
Courts cannot order DNA testing routinely or as a matter of course in criminal proceedings. It must be shown to have a direct evidentiary link to the specific charge, and it cannot be used to override the law's strong protection of a child's legitimacy where the child was born during a valid, subsisting marriage.