Court Cannot Order DNA Test Without Strong Prima Facie Case: Punjab and Haryana High Court

High Court Sets Aside Trial Court Order for DNA Testing in Property Dispute Case, Emphasizing Right to Privacy and Burden of Proof - The Punjab and Haryana High Court has overturned a trial court’s order mandating DNA testing in a contentious property dispute case. The judgment, rendered by Justice Deepak Gupta, underscores the necessity of a strong prima facie case before ordering such tests, and highlights the balance between the right to privacy and the need for evidence.

Chand Kaur, the petitioner, contested an order from the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Sonepat, which mandated DNA testing to establish familial ties in a property dispute. The respondent, Ramdei @ Om Pati, claimed to be the daughter of Harphool Singh and sought a declaration of possession and a permanent injunction on this basis. Kaur opposed this, citing multiple prior litigations where Om Pati identified herself as the daughter of Shiv Dayal, thereby challenging her current claim.

Justice Deepak Gupta, drawing from precedents, emphasized that the burden of proof rests on the plaintiff who asserts a positive claim. In this case, Ramdei @ Om Pati needed to substantiate her claim of being Harphool Singh’s daughter without relying on compelled DNA evidence from the petitioner.

The court referred to the Supreme Court’s rulings in Ashok Kumar vs. Raj Gupta and others, and Banarsi Dass vs. Teeku Dutta, which caution against routine ordering of DNA tests. These decisions highlight the importance of privacy and the potential societal repercussions of forced genetic testing. Justice Gupta noted, “The presumption of legitimacy and the right to privacy are paramount, and a DNA test should not be ordered merely as a matter of course.”

The judgment elaborated on the principles governing the ordering of DNA tests in civil suits. It reiterated that a party cannot be compelled to undergo a DNA test to gather evidence for the opposing side. The court cited Bhabani Prasad Jena vs. Convenor Secretary Orissa State Commission for Women and other cases to support the view that such tests should only be directed when there is a compelling need and a strong prima facie case.

Justice Gupta remarked, “It is for the plaintiff to lead evidence in support of her case. The petitioner cannot be compelled to undergo a DNA test to substantiate the plaintiff’s claims, especially when the plaintiff has previously identified herself differently in multiple litigations.”

The Punjab and Haryana High Court’s ruling reinforces the judicial principle that DNA testing in civil disputes should be ordered sparingly and only when justified by a robust prima facie case. This decision protects individual privacy rights and ensures that the burden of proof remains appropriately placed. The judgment sets a significant precedent for handling similar disputes, emphasizing the need for concrete evidence without encroaching on personal autonomy.

Date of Decision: July 9, 2024

Chand Kaur vs. Ramdei @ Om Pati and others