Ivan Rathinam vs Milan Joseph 2025 INSC 115 - S 112 Evidence Act - DNA Test - S 7 Family Courts Act

Indian Evidence Act - Section 112 -Legitimacy determines paternity under Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, until the presumption is successfully rebutted by proving ‘non-access’ (Para 70) The contention that ‘paternity’ and ‘legitimacy’ are distinct or independent concepts is a misdirected notion - An ‘additional’ access or ‘multiple’ access does not automatically negate the access between the spouses and prove non-access thereof- There exists a strong presumption that the husband is the father of the child borne by his wife during the subsistence of their marriage. This section provides that conclusive proof of legitimacy is equivalent to paternity - Access and non-access under Section 112 do not require a party to prove beyond reasonable doubt that they had or did not have sexual intercourse at the time the child could have been begotten. ‘Access’ merely refers to the possibility of an opportunity for marital relations - In such a scenario, while parties may be on non-speaking terms, engaging in extra-marital affairs, or residing in different houses in the same village, it does not necessarily preclude the possibility of the spouses having an opportunity to engage in marital relations- Non-access means the impossibility, not merely inability, of the spouses to have marital relations with each other. (Para 32-33)

Indian Evidence Act - Section 112 - DNA Test - When dealing with the eminent need for a DNA test to prove paternity, this Court balances the interests of those involved and must consider whether it is possible to reach the truth without the use of such a test.- First and foremost, the courts must, therefore, consider the existing evidence to assess the presumption of legitimacy. If that evidence is insufficient to come to a finding, only then should the court consider ordering a DNA test. Once the insufficiency of evidence is established, the court must consider whether ordering a DNA test is in the best interests of the parties involved and must ensure that it does not cause undue harm to the parties. There are thus, two blockades to ordering a DNA test: (i) insufficiency of evidence; and (ii) a positive finding regarding the balance of interests.

Family Courts Act, 1984 - Section 7-8 -Family Court has exclusive jurisdiction over a suit or proceeding for a declaration as to the legitimacy of a person. However, the Family Court cannot entertain any proceedings for a declaration of legitimacy without a claim on the marital relationship.

Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Section 11 -The principle of res judicata is a salutary and pragmatic edict to reinforce the doctrine of finality. When a matter, whether on a question of fact or question of law, has been decided between two parties in a suit and the decision is final, neither party will be allowed to canvass the matter again in a future suit or proceeding. Without this bar, parties would be immobilized for all eternity, due to the uncertainty regarding their rights and entitlements. Res judicata infuses predictability in legal adjudication. The courts are thus, under a bounden duty to enforce this statutory embargo where the facts of the case overwhelmingly satisfy the ingredients of Section 11 of the CPC. (Para 65)