Supreme Court Restricts DNA Testing in Paternity Disputes Linked to Criminal Cases

The Supreme Court of India has set a significant precedent in R. Rajendran v. Kamar Nisha and Others (2025 LiveLaw (SC) 1086), ruling that DNA tests to determine paternity cannot be ordered unless there is a direct and demonstrable nexus with the alleged offence. The judgment reinforces the sanctity of the presumption of legitimacy for children born within wedlock and upholds the right to privacy.

Background/Context

The case stemmed from a criminal complaint by the respondent, who alleged an extramarital relationship with the appellant, a doctor, and claimed her child was fathered by him. The complaint led to charges of cheating and harassment under Sections 417 and 420 of the IPC and the Tamil Nadu Women Harassment Act. During investigation, police sought DNA testing of the appellant, respondent, and child. The appellant refused, but the Madras High Court ordered the test, which was later affirmed by a Division Bench.

Supreme Court’s Decision

The Supreme Court, led by Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Vipul M. Pancholi, examined Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act, which provides a conclusive presumption of legitimacy for children born during a valid marriage. The Court held that this presumption can only be displaced by strong evidence of non-access between spouses at the relevant time. In this case, official records listed the husband as the father, and no evidence of non-access was presented.

The Court further clarified that DNA testing is a serious intrusion on privacy and bodily autonomy, protected under Article 21 of the Constitution. Such tests must only be ordered when absolutely necessary for the investigation and must pass the tests of legality, legitimate state aim, and proportionality. The paternity question was deemed collateral to the criminal charges, and the offences alleged did not require proof of paternity.

The Court also rejected the argument for adverse inference due to refusal to undergo DNA testing, stating that such inference is only justified after a lawful order for testing is made.

Why This Matters

This ruling protects individuals and families from unnecessary and invasive DNA testing, especially in criminal cases where paternity is not central to the alleged offence. It upholds the dignity and privacy of children and alleged fathers, and sets a high threshold for courts before ordering such tests.

Legal Principle Highlighted

Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act—presumption of legitimacy is conclusive unless non-access is proven. The judgment also references constitutional safeguards under Article 21 (right to privacy) and clarifies the limited scope of Sections 53 and 53A of the CrPC for medical examination in criminal investigations.