New Delhi:
The Supreme Court gave an important verdict on Tuesday in the nearly 2 decades of old case dealing with the perception of paternity and validity. In this case, a 23 -year -old boy had demanded a DNA test from his alleged biological father, citing his mother’s marriage. However, the court rejected the petitioner’s demand, saying that the other person also has the right to privacy. The apex court said that there is a need to create a balance between the right to know the real parents and the right to privacy of that person.
What is the whole matter?
The 23 -year -old young man’s mother married in 1989. She had a daughter in 1991. The son was born in 2001. Her mother separated from her husband in 2003. The couple divorced in 2006.
Immediately after this, the woman contacted the Cochin Municipal Corporation to change her son’s father’s name in the birth record.
-When the officials said that they could not change the birth record without the order of the court, then the woman and her son started a long legal battle.
In 2007, the court ordered the alleged biological father to undergo DNA Test. The person challenged the order in the High Court in 2008 and got relief.
-Haycourt said that the DNA test can be ordered only when the parties can prove to be a non-wheel between the husband and wife.
Widow daughter-in-law does not need to give alimony to her mother-in-law: Bombay High Court order
Long legal battle
– The local court cited Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, which establishes that the child born during the valid marriage or within 280 days of the end of marriage is a legitimate child of the husband.
– Later decisions brought more shocks for mother and son. A lower court admitted that there was no need to refer to the parties for the DNA test.
-He said that he is suffering from many health problems and has undergone many surgery, whose expenses he and his mother are unable to bear.
– He also said that he is not getting any maintenance from his legal father for his medical or educational expenses.
– The court revived the maintenance petition. After this, the alleged biological father challenged it in the High Court.
– In 2018, the High Court ruled in favor of the son. It said that the validity of birth is irrelevant while considering the child’s right to get maintenance from his biological father.
-And also admitted that validity does not stop the child’s real paternity. After this, the alleged biological father challenged this order in the Supreme Court. The order states that it is a fact that when the son was born, her mother was married to her husband.
Is a Muslim divorced woman entitled to live allowance or not? SC kept the decision safe
What did the Supreme Court say?
Justice Suryakant and Justice Ujjal Bhui’s bench Nebate’s alleged biological father rejected the demand for DNA test. The court said that this is a violation of the right to privacy of the person. The court has considered the son a legitimate child of his mother’s ex -husband and his legal father. In this way, the court closed the case going on for two decades.
Right to privacy
Justice Suryakant said, “The son needs to balance his real parents and the right to privacy of the person, which he claims that he is his father.”
The court said that forcibly conducting a DNA test can be seen by the outside world on the personal life of a person. He said, “That investigation, especially when related to infidelity cases, can be harsh and can destroy the reputation of a person in the society.”
How will he live himself … In 12 thousand salary, wife demanded 10 thousand alimony, judge objected in court, video viral
The court said, “It can irreversible affect the mental health of the person as well as his social and professional life. For this reason, he has the right to take some action to protect his dignity and privacy, which in which he has the right to take some action in which Refusal to DNA test is also involved. “
Aspect of woman’s reputation
The court said that in this case, the child’s mother is actively associated with litigation, but anyone can imagine the results in such cases; Where the child wants to declare paternity by disregarding his mother’s feelings.
The court said, “The provision of such rights may lead to its possible misuse against weaker women. They will face a lawsuit in the court and public opinion court, due to which they will be quite mental other than other issues. There will be trouble.
The Supreme Court said that even though it was assumed that the mother had an extramarital affair and due to that she was born, it would not be enough to end the perception of validity. The court said, “In fact, they were married to 1989. The court said that it is clear that the mother and her husband had access to each other during the wedding.”
‘Looks like Kalyug has come …’: Allahabad HC on the legal battle of elderly couple for alimony
Instruction
The bench said that this complex case, which has been spread over two decades, has affected the parties involved and should be closed for all objectives and goals. The court ruled that the validity determines paternity under Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, unless the estimates are denied by proving ‘non-catering’.
The court said that such an allegation brings light on only one thing, that it seems that the appellant and (husband) defendant’s mother had access together. However, it needs to be clarified that ‘additional’ access or ‘multiple’ access automatically does not deny the reach between husband and wife and does not prove that there is no access between the two. It is a legal order that a 23 -year -old man should be considered the son of his legal father.
After the engineer suicide case in Bengaluru, SC fixed 8 point formula on divorce and alimony
(Tagstotranslate) Supreme Court (T) Paternity (T) Biological Father (T) Maintenance Allowance (T) Supreme Court (T) Supreme Court (T) Adultry (T) Pavement Testing (T) DNA Test
