New Delhi, Nov 10: DNA testing cannot be ordered in a routine manner and must be subject to stringent safeguards to protect the dignity of individuals and the legitimacy of children born during the wedlock, the Supreme Court said on Monday.
A bench of Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Vipul Pancholi said the power to direct such tests must be exercised with utmost circumspection and only when the interests of justice imperatively demand such an intrusive procedure.
The apex court said forcefully subjecting an individual to DNA testing constitutes a grave intrusion upon privacy and personal liberty.
Such an encroachment can be justified only if it satisfies the threefold test of legality, legitimate State aim, and proportionality, it said.
“DNA testing cannot be ordered as a matter of course and must be subject to stringent safeguards to protect the dignity of individuals and the legitimacy of children born during the wedlock.
“Courts must remain vigilant against fishing inquiries masquerading as legitimate requests for scientific evidence, ensuring the sanctity of family relationships is not compromised by speculative or exploratory investigations,” the bench said.
The observations came on a plea filed by a Tamil Nadu-based doctor challenging an order of the Madras High Court which directed him to appear before the Dean, Government Rajaji Hospital, Madurai for collection of blood samples for DNA profiling.
In this case, a Muslim woman from Pattukottai had filed a petition contending that poverty forced her to marry a divorcee from the same locality in 2001.
Her husband was suffering from a skin ailment and, therefore, he approached the appellant, a doctor, for treatment. The appellant successfully treated his condition, which led him to confide in the doctor regarding his lack of progeny.
The husband requested the doctor to refer his wife to his first wife, who was a gynaecologist, for the necessary treatment. However, instead of referring, the doctor developed physical relations with her, resulting in the birth of a child on March 8, 2007.
It resulted in the petitioner’s husband abandoning her. In the meantime, she gave birth to a girl child. The doctor promised to look after her and the child and told her to stay at his house as a tenant. Accordingly, she gave ₹3 lakh to the doctor’s wife and stayed there for a while.
She subsequently asked the doctor to marry her and make their relationship public. Upon his refusal, a quarrel ensued in 2014. Thereafter, the doctor began avoiding her.
Unable to sustain herself, the woman approached a Tamil TV channel and appeared on a programme publicly narrating her complaint which led to registration of an FIR under Sections 417 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, and Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Women Harassment Act against the doctor.
The top court in its judgement set aside the high court order saying it rests upon the fundamental misapprehension of both statutory framework and constitutional safeguards.
“The offences alleged, falling under Sections 417 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Women Harassment Act, are neither of nature nor of a circumstance that warrant recourse to DNA analysis.
“The High Court’s invocation of Sections 53 and 53A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, rests on a misconstruction of their contextual ambit; these provisions contemplate medical examination only where such an examination may directly yield evidence relating to commission of the alleged offence,” the bench said.
The top court said compulsion of a DNA test transforms a lawful investigative power into an intrusive measure devoid of necessity, trenching upon the individual’s bodily autonomy and privacy.
“Scientific procedures, however advanced, cannot be employed as instruments of speculation; they must be anchored in demonstrable relevance to the charge and justified by compelling investigative need,” it said.
