Allahabad High Court Mandates DNA Test Before Granting Maintenance to Minor Girl
The Allahabad High Court has set aside a family court order that granted maintenance to a minor girl, directing that a DNA test be conducted first to establish her biological parentage. This significant ruling came on a plea filed by a man who claimed he was not the child's father, a request previously rejected by the Sonbhadra family court.
Court Emphasizes Right to Biological Truth in Paternity Disputes
While issuing the order, the court observed that in cases involving peculiar facts, both parents and children have the fundamental right to know the "biological truth." It emphasized that uncertainty about a child's parentage can have lifelong implications for all parties involved. Justice Madan Pal Singh passed this order on March 17 while hearing a criminal revision filed by Jawahir Lal Jaiswal against the family court's March 2025 ruling.
The trial court had originally directed Jaiswal to pay Rs 3,000 per month as maintenance from the date of application and Rs 6,000 from the date of judgment until the girl's marriage. His plea for DNA testing had been turned down by the lower court.
Father's Claims and Discrepancies in Records
Before the high court, Jaiswal presented a compelling case. He claimed his wife had left him in February 2000 and began living with another man. He argued that the girl, born in 2011, was from that illicit relationship. Since he had no physical relationship with his wife after 2000, he maintained he could not be the biological father.
The court conducted a thorough examination of trial court records and discovered significant discrepancies:
- The maintenance plea stated the mother stayed at her matrimonial home in 2010 and delivered the child on January 1, 2011
- The birth certificate showed the child was actually born on November 20, 2009
- Another medical record revealed she gave birth to a second child in July 2017, naming her alleged partner as the father
When questioned about these inconsistencies, the girl's counsel admitted that the woman had been living with her alleged partner after 2011 but insisted the first child was Jaiswal's.
High Court's Rationale for Ordering DNA Test
The High Court noted that the records made it impossible to determine several crucial facts:
- When and how often the woman returned to her husband's house after 2000
- How long she stayed during any such visits
- Who the biological father of the girl actually was
Finding merit in the father's claim, the court held that a DNA test was necessary to ascertain paternity definitively. The court acknowledged that while the Supreme Court, in R Rajendran vs Kamar Nisha (2025), held that DNA tests cannot be ordered as a matter of routine, the present case presented exceptional circumstances that warranted such testing.
The High Court also cited a 2024 ruling in Sachin Agarwal vs State of UP, which held that denying maintenance due to unresolved paternity issues violated basic human rights.
Court's Final Directions and Implications
Setting aside the family court's order entirely, the High Court directed that DNA testing of both the father and the minor girl be conducted as a priority. The family court has been instructed to decide the maintenance application afresh within three months of receiving the DNA test report.
This ruling establishes an important precedent in family law matters, balancing the right to maintenance with the fundamental right to know one's biological parentage. The court's emphasis on "exceptional circumstances" provides guidance for future cases where paternity disputes arise in maintenance proceedings.
