DNA Test Results Override Legal Presumption of Paternity: Maintenance Obligation Discharged

The Supreme Court held that DNA test results, excluding the petitioner as the biological father, outweighed the legal presumption of legitimacy under Section 112 of the Evidence Act. Consequently, the petitioner was not obligated to provide maintenance for the child. Prior maintenance orders for the child were set aside, but payments already made were not to be recovered.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Challenge to the paternity of the child.
2. Legitimacy and maintenance obligations under Section 112 of the Evidence Act.
3. Validity and implications of DNA test results.
4. Legal presumptions versus scientific evidence.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Challenge to the paternity of the child:
The petitioner, the husband, contested the paternity of the child, respondent No. 2, and claimed that he had no physical relationship with his wife after 1991. The wife alleged that she lived with her husband from June 1996 and conceived during that period. The Magistrate initially granted maintenance to the wife and child, which was upheld in subsequent revisions and petitions. The Supreme Court allowed a special leave petition and ordered DNA testing to ascertain paternity.

2. Legitimacy and maintenance obligations under Section 112 of the Evidence Act:
The respondents argued that the husband had access to his wife during the time of conception, thus invoking Section 112 of the Evidence Act, which presumes legitimacy if the child is born during a valid marriage. The Court noted that the wife admitted leaving and rejoining the matrimonial home, but no specific finding was recorded regarding the husband's access during the conception period.

3. Validity and implications of DNA test results:
The Supreme Court ordered DNA tests twice, which conclusively excluded the petitioner as the biological father of the child. The respondents initially did not oppose the DNA test but later challenged its validity after adverse results. The Court emphasized that the DNA test is scientifically accurate and genuine, thus should be considered valid evidence.

4. Legal presumptions versus scientific evidence:
The Court examined the conflict between the legal presumption under Section 112 of the Evidence Act and the scientific evidence provided by the DNA test. The Court acknowledged that while Section 112 creates a presumption of legitimacy, this presumption is rebuttable with evidence to the contrary. The DNA test, being scientifically accurate, was deemed sufficient to rebut the presumption of legitimacy.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court concluded that the DNA test results, which excluded the petitioner as the biological father, should prevail over the legal presumption of legitimacy under Section 112 of the Evidence Act. Consequently, the petitioner could not be held liable for the maintenance of the child. The Court set aside the previous judgments directing maintenance payments to respondent No. 2, but allowed the payments already made to remain unrecovered.

---