In Brief
A man claiming to be the biological son of a deceased couple sought a declaration of property ownership. The defendants denied his relationship and sought a court-ordered DNA test to settle the question. The plaintiff opposed the test, relying on documentary evidence including affidavits from the defendants themselves admitting he was their brother. The Supreme Court held that DNA testing cannot be forced without the test of 'eminent need' and that compelling it would violate the plaintiff's constitutional right to privacy. The court restored the trial court's decision, allowing the case to proceed based on the evidence already adduced, and emphasized that Indian law presumes legitimacy and protects individuals from being stigmatized as illegitimate."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.