Back
BIBEK CHAUDHURI
Auup Kumar Maity – Appellant
Versus
State of West Bengal – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
BIBEK CHAUDHURI, J.
1. The petitioner is the husband of the opposite party No.2. In the year 2018 the opposite party No.2 filed an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Purba Medinipur at Tamluk. The said application for maintenance was registered as Misc Case No.463 of 2018 and was transferred to the 3rd Court of the Learned Judicial Magistrate at Tamluk for disposal. In the said proceeding the opposite party No.2 filed an application praying for interim maintenance and the trial court allowed the said application directing the petitioner to make payment of Rs.5500/-per month in favour of the opposite party No.2. The petitioner has been going on paying the said amount of interim maintenance in favour of the opposite party No.2. Subsequently, on 12th January, 2021 the private opposite party filed another application for interim maintenance for her child, namely, Priyankshu Maity. It was pleaded by the opposite party No.2 that the said child was born in the wedlock between the petitioner and the opposite party No.2 on 30th June, 2019 in a private nursing home. The petitioner filed a written objection in
The presumption of legitimacy under Section 112 of the Evidence Act is conclusive unless rebutted by strong evidence of non-access, which the petitioner failed to provide.
The presumption of legitimacy under Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act is conclusive and can only be rebutted by strong evidence of non-access; DNA tests should not be ordered without a prima fac....
The presumption of legitimacy under Section 112 of the Evidence Act is conclusive and can only be rebutted by strong evidence of non-access; unilateral DNA tests conducted without consent are insuffi....
The paramount interest of the child and the cautious approach required for ordering DNA tests in paternity disputes.
DNA testing can be crucial for establishing maternity when denied, balancing evidentiary needs against privacy rights.
A DNA test to determine paternity is permissible in maintenance claims under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. when paternity is disputed, provided a compelling reason exists.
Paternity/Maternity of child – A person cannot be forced to undergo Paternity or Maternity test, but direction can be issued to a person to undergo DNA test.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
