The Supreme Court has determined that a man is not required to provide maintenance for a child if a DNA test conclusively shows he is not the biological father, even if the child was born during a valid marriage. A Bench consisting of Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice NK Singh upheld a ruling made by the Delhi High Court, dismissing an appeal from a woman contesting the lack of maintenance awarded to her daughter.

The case originated from a relationship where the woman, who worked as domestic help for the man for three years, alleged he engaged in a sexual relationship with her, promising marriage. They eventually married in March 2016, and their child was born in April 2016. However, their relationship quickly deteriorated, prompting the woman to seek legal recourse in July 2016 for interim maintenance, amounting to Rs 25,000 per month, and a protection order from her husband and his family.

Trial Court and Appellate Proceedings

During the legal proceedings, the Trial Court granted the respondent’s request for a DNA test, which confirmed that he was not the biological father of the child. In light of this finding and the assertion that the appellant had concealed her income, the Trial Court denied her request for interim maintenance. The First Appellate Court supported this decision, noting that the demand for the child’s maintenance was no longer pursued and agreeing with the Trial Court regarding the concealment issue.

The Delhi High Court subsequently analysed the legal presumptions of legitimacy as per Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. This statute typically safeguards children born during a valid marriage. The court ruled that this protection would apply only if the DNA test had not been conducted. Given that the test was completed with the appellant’s agreement, the High Court concluded that the statutory presumption of legitimacy was effectively rebutted. As such, it denied maintenance for the child but referred the issue of the woman’s maintenance back to the Trial Court for further review.

Supreme Court’s Confirmation and Child Welfare Considerations

In confirming the High Court’s ruling, the Supreme Court recognised the general hesitance among the judiciary to mandate DNA tests in paternity disputes. However, the Court noted that this case was exceptional since the DNA test had already been executed, accepted by both parties, and had reached a conclusive outcome. The Supreme Court stated that such definitive scientific evidence should take precedence over the statutory presumption outlined in Section 112, leading to the conclusion that the respondent was not obligated to pay maintenance for a child determined not to be his.

The Supreme Court found no legal errors in the High Court’s rationale and dismissed the appeal, deeming it “bereft of merit.” Despite the legal clarity established through this ruling, the Court expressed concern regarding the child’s welfare, recognising that the legal decision does not necessarily alleviate the practical challenges faced by the child. Consequently, the Court instructed the Secretary of the Women and Child Development Department, Government of NCT of Delhi, to evaluate the child’s living conditions, including access to education, healthcare, and other essential needs.

The Court further mandated that appropriate measures be taken to remedy any deficiencies identified during the assessment, placing importance on the State’s duty to ensure the child’s welfare and well-being. This directive highlights the judiciary’s commitment to balance legal judgments with the realities of children’s lives, reaffirming the responsibility of the State to care for vulnerable individuals.

Long or Short, get news the way you like. No ads. No redirections. Download Newspin and Stay Alert, The CSR Journal Mobile app, for fast, crisp, clean updates!

App Store –  https://apps.apple.com/in/app/newspin/id6746449540 

Google Play Store – https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.inventifweb.newspin&pcampaignid=web_share