A customer cannot be compelled to pay a service charge merely because it is written on a menu card: Delhi High Court affirms consumer’s right to choice Merely Because There Are Cash Rewards, It Does Not Mean The Employee Is Fit To Be Retained In Service: J&K & L High Court Blank Cheque Theory Rejected — Presumption Under Section 138 NI Act Stands Unrebutted In Absence Of Cogent Defence Persistent Neglect, Denial of Conjugal Rights, and Forced Spiritual Conformity Amounts to Mental Cruelty — Kerala High Court Upholds Divorce on Ground of Cruelty Such Approach Will Create a Barbaric Situation Wherein Innocent Persons Would Be Made Scapegoats: Punjab & Haryana High Court Criticizes Target-Based Anti-Drug Drive While Granting Bail Absconding Accused Cannot Seek Shelter Under Section 482 CrPC: Allahabad High Court Despite Procedural Irregularities - Deleted Images, Name on Parcel and Reverse Burden — Petitioner Must Explain Her Role — Calcutta High Court Declines Bail Under NDPS Act 13 Years, 7 Months, and 11 Days of Incarceration Without Conclusion of Trial Violates Article 21: Bombay High Court Grants Bail to Two Undertrials in Murder Case Unborn Child is Also a Dependent Entitled to Compensation under MV Act: Punjab and Haryana High Court Res Judicata | Competent Authority Has No Power to Review or Entertain Successive Deemed Conveyance Applications Without Resolving Prior Legal Disputes: Supreme Court Prima Facie Satisfaction Under Section 319 CrPC Is Not Conclusive Proof of Guilt, But Mere Probability Is Also Insufficient: Supreme Court Teachers Without Ph.D. Cannot Claim Higher Pay Scale and Re-designation as Associate Professors Under AICTE Norms: Supreme Court Wrong Quasi-Judicial Orders Without Extraneous Influence Cannot Invite Departmental Action: Supreme Court: Non-Compliance With Section 52-A NDPS Act and Standing Order No.1/89 Is Fatal to Prosecution: Supreme Court Acquits All Accused in Ganja Seizure Case Non-Examination of Eye-Witness Not Fatal to Motor Accident Claim: Punjab & Haryana High Court Reverses Tribunal’s Award Rejecting Compensation “Even a Criminal is Entitled to Dignity” : Supreme Court Slams Haryana Police for Violating Arnesh Kumar Guidelines; Orders Nationwide Circulation of Safeguards Against Illegal Arrests 125 CrPC | Mandatory Grant of Interest on Maintenance Cannot Be Overlooked:  Bombay High Court

Forcing to DNA test is violation of violate his personal liberty and right to privacy. – SC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


OCTOBER 1, 2021

The appellant seeks a declaration of ownership of property left by the late Trilok Chand Gupta and Sona Devi. He arrayed the couple's three daughters as defendants in the suit and claimed himself to be the son of Trilok Chand Gupta and Sona Devi. In their written statement, the defendants denied that the plaintiff is the son of their parents (Trilok Chand Gupta and Sona Devi), and as such, he is disentitled to any share in their parental property. The defendants also set up an exclusive claim on the property based on the Will dated 16.4.1982 (registered on 25.4.1982) executed by their late mother Sona Devi. The Defendants filed an application seeking direction from the Court to conduct a Deoxyribonucleic Acid Test (DNA) of the plaintiff and either of the defendants, to establish a biological link of the plaintiff to the defendants parents . But the same was dismissed and aggrieved by this order, defendants approached the High Court and the same was allowed. The Appellant approached the Apex court and question which has to be decided, whether in a declaratory suit where ownership over coparcenary property is claimed, the plaintiff, against his wishes, can be subjected to a DNA test and in the absence of consent, a party can be forced to provide a sample for a DNA test. Both replied in the negative. When the plaintiff is unwilling to subject himself to the DNA test, forcing him to undergo one would impinge on his personal liberty and his right to privacy. Appeal allowed. 

ASHOK KUMAR      

VERSUS 

RAJ GUPTA & ORS.

View Judgement

Similar News