Child Has Right to Know His Parentage — Mere Denial by Alleged Father Can't Override Truth — Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds DNA Test Order Without Police Force

“Balancing of Interest and Eminent Need for Truth Must Prevail Over Privacy Objection” — Punjab and Haryana High Court delivered a reasoned and impactful judgment, upholding a trial court’s decision to order a DNA test in a suit seeking declaration of paternity. The petitioner, who had denied being the father of the plaintiff, challenged the trial court's direction to undergo a DNA test. However, the High Court refused to interfere, emphasizing that the plaintiff — now an adult — has a fundamental right to establish his biological identity.

Justice Archana Puri observed: “When truth has to be established, as it undoubtedly can, justice to the child demands it. The right of privacy, as such, cannot override the right of the child and vest interest in his favour.”

“Why Should There Be Any Hesitation to Undergo the DNA Test If the Relationship Is Truly Denied?” — Court Questions Petitioner’s Resistance

The dispute centered around the plaintiff’s claim that he was the biological son of the petitioner, born in 1990 from a relationship between his mother and the petitioner after they began cohabiting. The petitioner denied the relationship altogether, claiming the plaintiff was a stranger.

The Court scrutinized this denial, especially in light of the mother’s clear affirmation of the relationship. In her written statement, she admitted that the petitioner and she lived together as husband and wife, and the plaintiff addressed them as ‘Papa’ and ‘Mummy’. The Court noted:

“Few of the photographs, depicting the trio to be a happy-go family, have also been placed on record.”

In this context, the Court found no illegality in the order directing a DNA test and noted:

“If the plaintiff and defendant No.1 are strangers as asserted, no injustice shall be done to defendant No.1 by conducting of this test. Rather, if he is father, his position will be put beyond doubt… When the paternity can be affixed by surer test, why rely merely on presumptions or inferences?”

Section 112 Evidence Act Not a Bar Where Child Seeks Paternity, Not Parent Resisting It

The petitioner had invoked Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act, which presumes legitimacy of a child born during a valid marriage. The Court clarified that such presumption protects a child born to married parents — but is inapplicable when an adult child seeks to establish paternity against a person other than the lawful husband of the mother.

“The rationale laid down in decisions where one spouse resists parenthood would not apply where a child on attaining adulthood moves to the Court to assert his paternity,” the Court held.

The alleged father relied on previous criminal litigation where the mother claimed a later date of marriage and the child's birth preceded it. But the Court emphasized:

“The child, as a plaintiff, has a right to know his parentage in the context of denial of relationship by defendant No.1… Justice to this child/plaintiff is a factor not to be ignored.”

Consent to DNA Testing Cannot Be Forced, But Refusal May Invite Adverse Inference

While the High Court upheld the order for DNA testing, it modified the trial court’s directive to use police force for securing blood samples. The Court underscored the right to bodily autonomy, echoing the law laid down in Ivan Rathinam v. Milan Joseph (2025) and Goutam Kundu v. State of West Bengal:

“No one can be compelled to give sample of blood… But the compliance/non-compliance or lack of inclination may allow the trial court to draw inference in the backdrop of the other evidence.”

Thus, while respecting the petitioner’s right to refuse testing, the Court left open the possibility for the trial court to draw adverse inference if the test is not undertaken.

Truth Must Prevail — DNA Test Allowed to Aid Declaration of Paternity

Summing up, the Court reiterated the principle of balancing rights — privacy of the alleged father versus the right of the child to know his biological origins. Given the denial of paternity, admission by the mother, and evidence of close association, the Court found sufficient basis for ordering DNA testing.

It concluded: “This test will surely assist the Court to reach the right conclusion vis-a-vis the relationship between the parties. That being so, it ought to be undertaken.”

Date of Decision: 12 August 2025