Quick Summary: The Supreme Court overturned a decision that required DNA testing to prove who the father was in a cheating case. The court stressed how important privacy is and that a child born during a marriage is considered legitimate.
In this case, R. Rajendran was told by the High Court of Madras at Madurai to take a DNA test to find out if he was the father of a child born to Kamar Nisha. The High Court's decision was based on a police report filed against Rajendran for cheating and harassment.
Kamar Nisha was married to Abdul Latheef in 2001. Latheef, who had a skin condition, went to Rajendran, a doctor, for treatment. Over time, Rajendran and Nisha developed a relationship, which led to the birth of a child on March 8, 2007. When Latheef found out, he reportedly left Nisha. This led to a series of legal battles, including a complaint on a TV show and a police report against Rajendran.
The case went through several rounds in court. Initially, the police wanted DNA testing to find out who the father was, but Rajendran did not agree. Nisha then asked for the investigation to be moved, and the High Court ordered the DNA testing to go ahead. Rajendran appealed this order, leading to more legal examination.
Presumption of Legitimacy: The court focused on a law that assumes a child born during a marriage is legitimate. This assumption can only be challenged by proving the married couple did not have access to each other, which Nisha could not show.
Privacy Concerns: The court pointed out the right to privacy, saying that DNA testing is intrusive and should only be done when absolutely necessary.
Lack of Evidence: The court found no strong evidence to disprove the child's legitimacy or to justify DNA testing. The documents always listed Abdul Latheef as the father, and there was no proof the couple did not have access to each other.
The Supreme Court decided that the High Court's order for DNA testing was not justified. It canceled the judgment, emphasizing that the child is considered legitimate according to the law, and people's privacy rights must be respected.
