New Delhi:
In a crucial verdict that deals with paternity and the notion of legitimacy, the Supreme Court today balanced the right of an individual to meet his biological father with the lack of will of another to accept said evidence for privacy.
The bank of Judge Surya Kant and Judge Ujjal Bhuyan were dealing with a two decades in which a 23 -year -old said that his birth was the result of his mother’s extramarital matter and wanted his paternity to be proved through A DNA test. He said he faced multiple health problems and had undergone several surgeries. He and his mother were struggling to pay the treatment costs and wanted to demonstrate their fatherhood to claim the maintenance of their biological father.
What is the case
According to the order, the mother of the 23 -year -old married in 1989 and had a daughter in 1991. The son was born in 2001 and her mother separated from her husband in 2003. They were granted divorce in 2006. Shortly after, The woman approached the Municipal Corporation of Cochin to change the name of her son’s father in the birth records. The woman supposedly told the authorities that she was in an extramarital relationship and that the child was born outside the matter. When the authorities said they could not change the birth records without a court order, the woman and her son began a long legal fight. In 2007, the court ordered the alleged biological father to undergo a DNA test. This man challenged the order in the Superior Court in 2008 and received relief. The Superior Court said that a paternity test can only be ordered if the parties can demonstrate that they do not have access among the spouses. The Court cited section 112 of the Evidence Law of India, 1872, which states that a child born during a valid marriage or within 280 days after the marriage ends is the legitimate son of the husband.
Subsequent decisions brought more setbacks for the mother and son. A lower court said there was no need to send the parties to a DNA test as a valid marriage to subsist between the mother and her husband when the child was born.
A maintenance plea
In 2015, the son, then 14 years old, approached a Family Court to relive a request for previous maintenance. He said he suffered from several health problems and that he had suffered several surgeries, that he and his mother could not pay. He also said he was not receiving any maintenance from his legal father for his medical or educational expenses. The court revived the maintenance request. The alleged biological father challenged this in the Superior Court.
In 2018, the Superior Court ruled in favor of the son. He said that the legitimacy of the birth was irrelevant when considering the right of the child to receive the maintenance of his biological father. The court also argued that the presumption of legitimacy does not prevent investigation into the true paternity of a child. The alleged biological father challenged this order in the Supreme Court.
The arguments and problems
Romy Chacko, appearing for an alleged biological father, said that the son had not proven to be not access between his mother and his husband when he was born, so there is conclusive evidence that he is the legitimate child of his marriage. Then you cannot claim the maintenance of a “third.” Chacko also said that his client cannot be ordered to perform a DNA test.
The lawyer of the son, Shyam Padman, argued that ‘paternity’ and ‘legitimacy’ are different concepts. “Paternity, as a concept, is intrinsically connected to maintenance; and maintenance can be claimed from the biological father even when the child is illegitimate.”
The question of legitimacy
The order says that it is a fact that when the son was born, his mother was married to her husband. “In fact, they had married since 1989 and neither had questioned the validity of the marriage. Without a doubt, they lived under the same roof from 1989 to 2003, when they decided to separate.” The court said it is obvious that the mother and her husband had access to each other throughout their marriage. “
The court argued that even if the mother had an extramarital relationship and that led to her birth, “it would not be enough to move the presumption of legitimacy.” “The only thing in which such accusation throws light is the fact that there seems to be simultaneously with the mother of the respondent, for the appellant and (the husband). However, what should be clarified is that an ‘additional’ ‘the access or access ‘multiple’ does not automatically deny access between spouses and shows that it has no access, “said the court, adding that there is a legal mandate that it is supposed that the 23 -year -old is the son of his father legal.
The angle of right to privacy
The bank said that it is necessary to balance the right of the child to know his true fatherhood with the right to privacy of the man he says is his father. “On the one hand, the courts must protect the rights of the parties to privacy and dignity by assessing whether the social stigma of one of them that declares themselves ‘illegitimate’ would cause disproportionate damage. On the other hand, the courts must Evaluate the child’s legitimate interest in knowing his biological father and if there is an eminent need for a DNA test, “says the order.
The court said that the force submitted to a DNA test would submit the private life of an individual to the scrutiny of the outside world. “That scrutiny, particularly when it comes to infidelity issues, can be hard and can eviscerate the reputation of a person and the position in society. It can irreversibly affect a person’s social and professional life, along with their mental health. To this, he has the right to undertake certain actions to protect his dignity and privacy, including the refusal to undergo a DNA test. “
The appearance of women’s reputation
The court pointed out that in this case, the child’s mother is actively associated with the litigation, but one can imagine the repercussions in cases where a child seeks a declaration of paternity by not taking into account her mother’s feelings. “The confermentation of such right can lead to their potential misuse against vulnerable women. They would be subject to trial in a court of justice and in the public opinion court, causing them significant mental anguish, among other issues. It is in this sphere that their right to dignity and privacy deserve special consideration. “
“It should be noted that the law only allows a preliminary investigation into the private life of a person by allowing the parties to bring registered evidence to demonstrate that the presumption of legitimacy does not exhort the undertaking. When the law establishes a way to achieve a particular mode .
The addresses
The bank indicated that the convoluted case that covers more than two decades, has affected the parties involved and should be closed for all purposes. The Court ruled that legitimacy determines paternity under section 112 of the Indian Evidence Law, 1872, until the presumption is refunded when proven the “not operated.”
The court said that any claim of the 23 -year -old on his perceived relationship with the man he says is that his father is denied. The man is assumed that the court is the legitimate son of his mother’s ex -husband and his legal father.
By
