The Kerala High Court has emphasized the importance of conducting a DNA test to determine the paternity of a child when there is prima facie evidence of long cohabitation between a man and a woman. The court's decision came while rejecting a man's plea challenging a family court order that directed him to undergo a blood test for DNA verification.

Justice Mary Joseph, delivering the judgment, highlighted that dismissing pleas for a DNA test in such cases would not only cast a social stigma upon the child but also upon the mother. The court emphasized that refusing an order for DNA testing could potentially "bastardize" the child in the eyes of society and subject both the child and the mother to the labels of "bastard" and "immoral" respectively.

The case involved a woman who claimed to be the man's wife and presented a prima facie case of cohabitation, while the man failed to establish a similar prima facie case to support his claim that the woman led an immoral life. The court concluded that it could not disregard the woman's request for a DNA test to establish the paternity of her child.

The court also addressed the disputed claims of maintenance sought by the woman for herself and the child. While acknowledging that an illegitimate child is eligible for maintenance, the court emphasized the need to establish paternity to enable the court to order financial support from the alleged father.

According to the woman's claims, she and the petitioner had fallen in love and entered into a relationship, which resulted in her pregnancy. The woman alleged that the petitioner had promised to marry her and had provided financial support and care during her pregnancy. However, upon coming to Kollam, she discovered that the petitioner had married another woman.

The woman further alleged that despite their differences, they continued to cohabitate, and the petitioner took care of their living expenses. The petitioner also made promises to purchase a flat in the woman's name and secure an insurance policy for their daughter's education and marriage. However, he failed to fulfill these commitments, leading the woman to demand compliance. Subsequently, the petitioner ceased providing maintenance payments in 2013.

The woman initially filed a complaint with the Kerala Women's Commission, which ordered the petitioner to undergo a DNA test. However, due to the petitioner's non-cooperation, the test did not materialize. The woman then approached the Family Court in Ernakulam, which directed the petitioner to undergo a blood test for DNA verification.

In his plea to the High Court, the petitioner alleged that the woman was leading a promiscuous life and seeking to humiliate him for monetary gain. After carefully examining the evidence and relevant precedents, the Kerala High Court found prima facie evidence of long cohabitation and upheld the family court's order for a DNA test to determine the paternity of the child.

The court's decision, in this case, underscores the significance of protecting the rights of the child and the mother, preventing social stigma, and ensuring justice in paternity disputes. It sets a precedent for considering DNA testing as a crucial tool in resolving such matters and upholding the interests of all parties involved.

Click here to read the judgment