DNA evidence can rebut legitimacy presumption under Section 112 and defeat maintenance liability where paternity is excluded.

Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act ordinarily raises a conclusive presumption of legitimacy for a child born during a valid marriage, but the presumption can be displaced where reliable scientific evidence shows otherwise. Here, DNA reports from two forensic laboratories consistently excluded the appellant as the biological father, and the earlier DNA-testing directions had attained finality. On that basis, the scientific evidence was treated as prevailing over the presumption, and paternal liability could not be fastened on the appellant. The direction to pay maintenance to the child was therefore unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the presumption of legitimacy under Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 could be displaced by DNA evidence showing that the appellant was not the biological father of the child, and whether maintenance to the child could therefore be sustained.

Analysis: The child was born during the subsistence of a valid marriage, so Section 112 ordinarily raised a conclusive presumption of legitimacy. However, the Court held that Section 112 is a presumption and not a legal fiction, and that where reliable scientific evidence is available, the best available proof must be preferred in the interest of justice. The DNA reports from two forensic laboratories consistently excluded the appellant as the biological father, and the earlier orders directing DNA testing had attained finality. In these circumstances, the scientific evidence rebutted the presumption and showed that the appellant could not be fastened with paternal liability for the child.

Conclusion: The presumption under Section 112 stood displaced by the DNA evidence, and the direction to pay maintenance to the child was unsustainable; the issue was decided in favour of the appellant.

Ratio Decidendi: Where conclusive proof of legitimacy under Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 conflicts with reliable DNA evidence, the scientific evidence prevails and the presumption of legitimacy can be rebutted.

---