Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Smt. Jharna Roy vs Sri Sudipta Roy & Anr on 10 February, 2020
1
10-02-2020
Subrata IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Civil Appellate Jurisdiction
.
CAN No.829 of 2020 In F.A.T.No.378 of 2018 Smt. Jharna Roy
-vs-
Sri Sudipta Roy & Anr.
Mr. Siddhartha Banerjee Ms. Soni Ojha Ms. Aishwarya Chatterjee ...for the appellant Mr. Swagato Datta Mr. Surendra Kumar Sharma Ms. Sneha Chatterjee ...for respondent no.1 The first respondent in this appeal has prayed for an order for conduct of a medical test through DNA profiling to ascertain the paternity of Sweta Roy claimed by the appellant to have been born to the parties through the wedlock. The respondent has throughout alleged before the court below and us that the child is not his but is fathered by Satadal Singha, the proforma respondent herein.
The learned judge of the court below in the judgement and decree under appeal dated 30th April 2018 had held the appellant-wife guilty of adultery. He had also declared that Sweta was not the child of the respondent. It is on record that the appellant had at the proceedings before the trial court refused to undergo the DNA test. Now she is willing.
2It may not follow from the proof of adultery that the issue born out of marriage is not that of the husband. It may be the case that adultery is proved, but still the paternity of the child belongs to the husband. In some cases adultery may result in a child being born outside the wedlock.
Mr Datta, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-husband, is very firm in his submission that his client is not the father of the child, and that Sweta should not be allowed to use his name. He refuses to maintain her.
Mr Banerjee, learned counsel for the appellant, argues that the learned judge made an error in his finding with regard to paternity.
We are of the opinion that for complete adjudication of the disputes between the parties, this application (CAN No.829 of 2020) by the appellant should be allowed. Learned counsel for the parties agree that the DNA test report would be accepted by them without asking for any further expert probe into the correctness of the report.
In those circumstances, we direct the Secretary to the Health Department, Government of West Bengal to cause any competent officer subordinate to him to nominate a specially equipped State hospital for conduct of the paternity test of the child, Sweta Roy, through the DNA profiling technology. The child, Sweta, and the 3 parties to this appeal - Smt. Jharna Roy, Sri Sudipta Roy and Sri Satadal Singha - would have to submit to the test and render all cooperation in its conduct. The nominated hospital will have to submit a report in this court by 20th March 2020. The obligation to take steps in the matter would be in the appellant. Copies of the report before its filing in court should be circulated to the above persons, except Sweta, who undergo the test.
The application (CAN No.829 of 2020) is accordingly disposed of.
List the appeal on 24th March 2020.
[I.P. Mukerji, J] [Md. Nizamuddin, J] 4