Back
PRASHANT KUMAR
Sachin Agarwal – Appellant
Versus
tate Of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Prashant Kumar, J.
1. Heard Shri Arvind Kumar, appearing for the applicant, Shri Shashidhar Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as Sri Rajesh Rai, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and perused the records.
2. The instant application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant praying for quashing of the order dated 03.11.2021 passed by Additional Civil Judge/Family Court, District Mathura, in case no. 901 of 2019 (Smt. Mamata Vs. Sachin) under Section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station Vrindavan, District Mathura.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that there is matrimonial dispute between the parties. It is alleged that earlier the opposite party no.2 was married to one Sunil Kumar. After the disappearance of Sunil Kumar for many years, the opposite party no.2 re-married the present applicant and out of their wedlock two children were born. Thereafter there was some matrimonial discord and hence the opposite party no.2 had filed application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. for maintenance. In the pending proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C., applicant had filed an application stating therein that the children are not of his and hence there w
DNA testing is essential in paternity disputes to determine maintenance obligations, emphasizing children's welfare and rights.
The discretion to order a DNA test in a maintenance claim under Section 125 of the Code requires a strong prima facie case to establish non-access, and the legitimacy of a child should not be put to ....
The only disadvantage to the child which is put forward as an argument against the use of a blood test, not for therapeutic purposes but to ascertain paternity, is that the child is exposed to the ri....
Point of law: The only disadvantage to the child which is put forward as an argument against the use of a blood test, not for therapeutic purposes but to ascertain paternity, is that the child is exp....
DNA tests in paternity disputes must be supported by strong prima facie evidence and should not be ordered routinely, respecting the presumption of paternity under Section 112 of the Evidence Act.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the necessity of proving the disputed marriage before ordering a DNA test to determine the legitimacy of a child. The court emphasized the sparing ....
Husband cannot be asked to pay maintenance to a child where DNA test report records that he is not biological father of child.
The court established that determining biological parentage is vital for maintenance claims, endorsing DNA testing as an essential tool in cases where parentage is disputed.
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
