When Can Courts Order DNA Tests in Divorce Cases? Madhya Pradesh High Court Explains

The Madhya Pradesh High Court recently upheld an order directing a DNA test of a minor child in a matrimonial dispute, holding that such a direction was justified where the test was sought not to determine the legitimacy of the child but to substantiate allegations of adultery in a divorce proceeding.

Dismissing a petition filed by the wife, court ruled that the family court at Jabalpur had not erred in permitting the test, given the specific pleadings of non-access made by the husband and the limited purpose for which the DNA evidence was sought.

The petition arose from an order dated August 18, 2022, by the family court allowing the husband’s application for a DNA test to ascertain whether the girl child born during the subsistence of the marriage was biologically his.

The wife challenged this direction, arguing that it violated the child’s right to privacy and impermissibly cast a shadow on her legitimacy. She contended that the conclusive presumption of legitimacy under Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act could not be disturbed lightly and relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in Aparna Ajinkya Firodia v. Ajinkya Arun Firodia to submit that courts should refrain from ordering DNA tests as a matter of routine. Appearing for the wife, Advocate Anuj Pathak argued that the family court had failed to balance the child’s best interests and that compelling a DNA test would irreversibly stigmatise the child.

Opposing the plea, Advocate Sheetal Tiwari, appearing for the husband, argued that the petition was filed with suppression of material facts. It was pointed out that the divorce petition, filed on the ground of adultery, contained detailed pleadings of non-access. The husband, an Army personnel, claimed that he visited the wife, a constable in the Madhya Pradesh Police, only intermittently due to his posting. He alleged that he had been called home in October 2015 and informed within four days that his wife had conceived, a claim he later discovered to be medically implausible. The child, he further pleaded, was born within eight months of that visit, reinforcing his assertion that he had no access at the time of conception.

Justice Vivek Jain, after examining the pleadings and the applicable legal principles, held that the case squarely fell within the category where a DNA test could be ordered to prove adultery, without disturbing the statutory presumption of legitimacy. Court drew extensively from the Supreme Court’s ruling in Dipanwita Roy v. Ronobroto Roy, which recognised that in divorce proceedings based on adultery, DNA testing may be the most reliable means to establish or rebut allegations of infidelity, even if the issue of legitimacy arises incidentally.

The high court noted that the Supreme Court has consistently cautioned against routine DNA testing and has emphasised the need to balance competing interests. However, it observed that subsequent decisions, including Ivan Rathinam v. Milan Joseph and R. Rajendran v. Kamar Nisha, reaffirm that where there is an “eminent need” and sufficient pleadings of non-access, courts may permit such tests. In the present case, the husband’s pleadings were found to be specific, detailed and directly linked to the ground of adultery.

Importantly, court clarified that the husband was not seeking a declaration of illegitimacy nor attempting to evade responsibility towards the child. The DNA test was sought solely to establish the alleged adulterous conduct of the wife. Viewed in this context, court held that Section 112 of the Evidence Act did not operate as an absolute bar.

Upholding the family court’s order, the high court dismissed the wife’s petition and observed that if she continued to refuse to provide DNA samples, the family court would be at liberty to draw an adverse presumption under Section 114(h) of the Evidence Act.

Case Title: Kamla Patel v. Govind Bahadur

Order Date: January 20, 2026

Bench: Justice Vivek Jain