DNA Test in Domestic Violence Cases: Madras HC Upholds Presumption of Legitimacy under BSA/IEA

KanoonHQ Legal Gazette · AI-generated brief from the source linked below. How briefs are made

Published 14 October 2026

Statutes: Indian Evidence Act, 1872 — s.112
Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 — s.109
Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005
Source: Indian Kanoon (Madras HC)

Bottom Line Up Front (BLUF)

The Madras High Court, in K. Kamaraj v. Susai Ammal, upheld the dismissal of a husband's plea for a DNA test in a domestic violence case. The Court affirmed that a DNA test cannot be ordered to disprove paternity unless strong prima facie evidence rebuts the presumption of legitimacy under Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act (now Section 109 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam), demonstrating lack of access during conception.

Ratio Decidendi · Legal Principle Established

A DNA test to determine paternity cannot be ordered in a domestic violence proceeding unless the party seeking it first presents strong prima facie evidence to rebut the presumption of legitimacy under Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (or Section 109 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023), specifically by demonstrating non-access between the spouses during the period of conception.

Practice & Procedural Impact for Advocates

Advocates seeking DNA tests to dispute paternity must establish a strong prima facie case of non-access, not merely suspicion. Litigants should be prepared for courts to prioritize the presumption of legitimacy, requiring substantial evidence to overcome it. Courts will scrutinize the timing of such applications, especially if raised belatedly in ongoing proceedings.

Key Legal Takeaways

1Presumption of legitimacy under BSA/IEA Section 109/112 is strong and requires robust evidence to rebut.
2Mere suspicion or a bald assertion of non-paternity is insufficient to order a DNA test.
3The burden is on the party seeking the DNA test to prove non-access during the period of conception.
4DNA tests are not routinely granted in domestic violence cases to determine paternity without compelling grounds.

The Legal Issue This Criminal Revision Case before the Madras High Court concerned the dismissal of a husband's application for a DNA test to disprove the paternity of a child born during the subsistence of marriage. The husband sought the DNA test under Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (now Section 109 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023), within the context of a domestic violence proceeding initiated by his wife. The core legal question was whether a DNA test could be ordered based on a mere assertion of non-paternity, without first establishing a strong prima facie case of non-access between the spouses during the period of conception.

Court's Reasoning The Madras High Court upheld the decision of the District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Kalasapakkam, which had dismissed the husband's petition for a DNA test. The High Court reiterated the well-established legal principle that the presumption of legitimacy under Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act (or Section 109 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam) is a strong one. This presumption can only be rebutted by cogent and conclusive evidence proving that the parties had no access to each other at any time when the child could have been begotten. The Court noted that the husband failed to provide any material to suggest non-access with the respondent during the relevant period. Without such foundational evidence, a DNA test cannot be ordered, as it would undermine the strong presumption of legitimacy and potentially stigmatize the child.

Why It Matters This decision reinforces the high threshold required for ordering DNA tests to dispute paternity, particularly in ongoing matrimonial or domestic violence proceedings. It underscores that courts will not readily grant such requests based on mere suspicion or a bald denial of paternity. For advocates, it highlights the critical importance of presenting substantial prima facie evidence of non-access to rebut the presumption of legitimacy before seeking a DNA test. Litigants must understand that the legal system prioritizes the protection of a child's legitimacy, and a DNA test is considered an extraordinary measure, not a routine tool for disproving paternity without compelling grounds. Counsel should confirm whether the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 or the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 applies based on the date of the proceeding.