SETS ASIDE DNA TEST ORDER IN PATERNITY DISPUTE CASE - STRONG PRIMA FACIE CASE REQUIRED – P&H HC

Date: 29.05.2023

In a significant ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court, in a revision petition, set aside an order for a DNA test in a paternity dispute case. The court emphasized the need for a strong prima facie case and protected the right to privacy of the defendant, stating that a party cannot be compelled to prove their case in the manner suggested by the contesting party.

The case involved Vijay Kumar Garg, also known as Dee Cee Gharianwala, as the defendant No.1-petitioner, and Kajal alias Nicky and another as the respondents. The plaintiff, Kajal alias Nicky, had filed a suit seeking a declaration that she is the daughter of the defendant No.1-petitioner and defendant No.2-respondent No.2. The defendant No.1-petitioner had denied the allegations. Both parties had presented their evidence in court.

The court, while examining the issue, highlighted that a DNA test should not be ordered as a matter of routine. The burden of proof lies on the litigating party, and a party cannot be compelled to prove their case in the manner suggested by the contesting party. The court further emphasized that a DNA test cannot be ordered for a roving enquiry.

Referring to previous judgments, including Banarsi Dass v. Teeku Dutta (2005) 4 SCC 449 and Bhabani Prasad Jena v. Orissa State Commission for Women (2010) 8 SCC 633, the court reiterated that a strong prima facie case and the balancing of interests of the parties are crucial factors in ordering a DNA test. The court also considered the right to privacy and protection from stigmatization, recognizing the potential adverse impact on an individual's personal and social life if subjected to a DNA test.

The court further examined the timing of the application for the DNA test and the proportionality of the legitimate aims pursued. It emphasized the importance of protecting the right to privacy and personal autonomy of the plaintiff, particularly in a declaratory suit where the plaintiff had already presented evidence and was not interested in producing additional evidence, such as a DNA test, to prove their case.

Consequently, the court allowed the revision petition, setting aside the impugned order for the DNA test, and dismissed the application. The court held that the plaintiff had failed to establish a strong prima facie case for ordering the DNA test. This ruling highlights the significance of a strong prima facie case, the protection of privacy rights, and the need for a balanced approach in paternity dispute cases.

2023 Decided on: 29.05.2023

Vijay Kumar Garg @ Dee Cee Gharianwala vs Kajal @ Nicky and Another

• Lawyer E- News Android Mobile App
• Latest Legal News

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Vijay-Vs-Kajal-29-May-P^0H-HC.pdf"]