In a groundbreaking verdict, the Allahabad High Court has issued a compelling directive to a man entangled in paternity disputes: either fulfill his financial responsibilities towards his children or undergo a DNA test to substantiate his denial of fatherhood.
Justice Prashant Kumar, presiding over the case, emphasized the fundamental rights of the children, stressing that denying them maintenance over unresolved paternity issues flagrantly violates their basic rights.
The court deliberated extensively on the significance of DNA testing in resolving such disputes, recognizing its pivotal role in determining parental lineage and subsequently, financial support for the children.
While acknowledging the potential emotional and societal repercussions of DNA testing, the court underscored the imperative of conclusively resolving paternity disputes for the well-being and stability of all involved parties, particularly the children.
Highlighting the case’s context, the court revealed that the petitioner had adamantly refused to provide maintenance to the children, contending that they were not biologically his. This assertion prompted the family court to order a DNA test, a decision challenged by the petitioner.
In the legal discourse, the court referred to relevant provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, specifically noting the inclusion of DNA profiling as a legitimate form of examination, crucial in cases of paternity disputes.
Emphasizing the paramount importance of children’s best interests, the court emphasized that the denial of maintenance due to unresolved paternity issues constitutes a grave violation of their inherent human rights, as recognized by international declarations.
In its verdict, the court firmly asserted that the petitioner cannot evade accountability by simultaneously denying paternity and refusing to undergo the prescribed DNA test. Failure to comply would result in adverse inferences under the Indian Evidence Act, the court cautioned.
Hence, the court unequivocally mandated the petitioner to either fulfill his financial obligations or undergo the DNA test as ordered by the family court, thereby ensuring the fair dispensation of justice and safeguarding the children’s rights.
Advocate Arvind Kumar represented the petitioner, while Advocate Shashidhar Pandey stood for the State, and Advocate Rajesh Rai represented the respondent-wife.
