DNA Test Denied | Husband Questions Child's Paternity Over Wife's Alleged Infidelity, Madras HC Rejects His Plea & Imposes ₹50,000 Costs

MADRAS: The Madras High Court has dismissed a husband's plea seeking a DNA paternity test of his son, holding that DNA testing cannot be used merely to prove a wife's alleged infidelity. The Court imposed ₹50,000 costs on the husband, finding that his application was intended to humiliate and defame his wife and delay the pending domestic violence proceedings.

Justice Shamim Ahmed, sitting at the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court, delivered the judgment on October 9, 2026, upholding the trial court's decision refusing the husband's request for DNA testing.

The case involved a couple who married on November 24, 2008, and subsequently had a son. Following matrimonial disputes, the wife initiated proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, in August 2013.

The husband questioned the child's biological paternity and claimed that he had no access to his wife during the relevant period of conception. He argued that a DNA test was necessary to establish whether he was the child's biological father.

In 2023, nearly ten years after the wife initiated domestic violence proceedings, the husband filed an application invoking Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, seeking a DNA paternity test.

However, the trial court rejected his application on December 1, 2023, finding that he failed to produce sufficient evidence to support his claim that he had been denied access to his wife.

The husband challenged the order before the Madras High Court, maintaining that scientific DNA evidence was necessary to determine the child's biological paternity.

The High Court observed that Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act creates a strong legal presumption of legitimacy for a child born during a valid marriage. This presumption can be challenged by proving that the husband and wife did not have access to each other during the relevant period.

The Court clarified that DNA testing cannot be ordered routinely in matrimonial disputes merely because a husband suspects his wife's infidelity.

It observed:

“DNA Testing cannot be used as a shortcut method to establish infidelity that might have occurred over a decade ago or subsequently after the birth of the male child”

The Court further emphasised that allegations of adultery against a wife cannot automatically justify subjecting a child to DNA testing.

It stated:

“The child cannot be used as a pawn to show that the mother of the child was living in adultery.”

The judgment also recognised that a husband has the legal right to prove his wife's alleged adultery through other admissible evidence, without unnecessarily interfering with the child's identity and legal rights.

The Court observed:

“It is always open to the husband to prove by other evidence the adulterous conduct of the wife, but the child's right to identity should not be allowed to be sacrificed.”

The High Court found that the husband failed to produce credible evidence of non-access during the relevant period and filed the DNA test application after a considerable delay.

It further concluded that the belated application was intended to humiliate the wife, damage her reputation and prolong the pending domestic violence and maintenance proceedings.

Accordingly, the Madras High Court dismissed the husband's criminal revision petition and imposed costs of ₹50,000 payable to the wife.

EXPLANATORY TABLE OF LAWS AND SECTIONS

CASE DETAILS

KEY TAKEAWAYS

• Husband Questions Paternity, Gets ₹50,000 Penalty: A husband sought a DNA test to establish biological paternity, but the Madras High Court rejected his plea and imposed costs.
• DNA Test Denied Despite Paternity Dispute: The Court ruled that suspicion of a wife's infidelity alone cannot justify DNA testing.
• Husband Must First Prove Non-Access: A husband challenging paternity must establish legally sufficient grounds before seeking scientific testing.
• Questioning Paternity Comes At A Cost: The Court found the husband's delayed application intended to humiliate his wife and prolong matrimonial proceedings.
• Men's Right To Know Biological Paternity Matters Too: A child's rights deserve protection, but genuine paternity disputes also require a fair legal process that respects the husband's interests.