Forcing DNA Test Upon A Party In Partition Suit To Determine Parentage Violates Right To Privacy: Orissa High Court

The Orissa High Court has recently held that forcing a party to a partition suit to undergo DNA test for ascertaining his/her parentage is unwarranted as it violates the right to privacy guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.Highlighting the legal untenability of such request made by the rival party, the single bench of Justice Bibhu Prasad Routray said –“In a suit for partition, the prayer for DNA test to determine parentage of rival party is unwarranted. It is to be borne in mind that forcing a person to undergo DNA test affects his right to privacy.”The Opposite Party No. 1, being the plaintiff before the trial Court, filed a suit for partition impleading the relevant shareholders including the petitioner, who is the Defendant No. 1 before the trial Court. The petitioner filed his written statement along with counter claim stating that Defendant No. 3 (Opposite Party No. 3 before the trial Court) is not entitled to any share in the property since he is not the son of Thutha Budula @ Kisan, a deceased shareholder. Therefore, the petitioner filed an application before the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kuchinda praying for DNA test of OP No. 3 to conclusively determine his parentage. However, the trial Court did not find any reason to entertain such application and accordingly, rejected the same. Hence, this civil miscellaneous petition was filed to impugn the order.The Court took note of the fact that the wife of Thutha Budula was examined as a witness before the trial Court who admitted OP No. 3 to be her son from her deceased husband. Keeping such testimony in view, the Court discussed the legal position as to maintainability of such request.Justice Routray placed reliance upon the judgment in Bhabani Prasad Jena v. Convenor Secretary, Orissa State Commission for Women & Anr. (2010) where the Apex Court briefly discussed the law regarding legality of prayer for DNA test to ascertain parentage. It re-invoked the law laid down in Goutam Kundu v. State of West Bengal & Anr. (1993) and Sharda v. Dharmpal (2003) which held that any order for DNA test can be given by the Court only if a strong prima facie case is made out raising doubt regarding paternity.In the instant case, the wife of the deceased shareholder admitted the OP No. 3 as her son out of her wedlock with the deceased. Furthermore, the petitioner never questioned the validity of the marriage between the witness and the deceased shareholder. Therefore, the Court held –“In such situation, directing for DNA test of the child on the face of admission of the mother would be an insult to her motherhood and against the law enumerated in section 112 of the Evidence Act. Apart from this, it is inconceivable how the DNA test would be relevant in a case of partition where the status of the parties as the members of joint family is required to be seen to determine their respective shares. It is important to be reminded here is that recognition of a person as son of another is not required to be determined through blood relation only and what is important is his recognition in the society as such.”The Court also cited the law solidified by a previous ruling of the High Court in Satyanarayan Chandra Deo v. Kumari Rajamani Deo (1985) which categorically held that a mother is the best witness to prove the parentage of the child. Resultantly, no fault was found with the impugned order. Accordingly, the petition was dismissed.Case Title: Golapi Majhi v. Bhabanishankar Budulal @ Kisan & Ors.Case No: CMP No. 758 of 2025Date of Judgment: August 18, 2025Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. B. Sahoo, AdvocateCounsel for the Opposite Parties: Mr. A.P. Bose, AdvocateCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ori) 113Click Here To Read/Download Order

Forcing DNA Test Upon A Party In Partition Suit To Determine Parentage Violates Right To Privacy: Orissa High Court

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags