Madras High Court
Venkatesh vs Seenivasan on 3 September, 2025
2025:MHC:2163
Crl.RC(MD)No.1222 of 2025
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 03.09.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SHAMIM AHMED
Crl.RC(MD)No.1222 of 2025
Venkatesh, S/o.Seenivasan
Old No.657, New No.1170, Keelatheru,
Vettiyur Village, Ariyakudi, Karaikudi Taluk
Sivagangai District Petitioner
Vs
Seenivasan, S/o.Rakappan, Seenivasa Mahal
Backside of Matha Kovil, Ariyakudi
Karaikudi Taluk, Sivagangai District Respondent
Prayer:- This Criminal Revision Case has been filed, under Sections 438
and 442 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) to set
aside the order dated, 22.07.2025 made in Crl.MP.No.1089 of 2025 in
MC.No.26 of 2022, by the Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi.
For Petitioner : Mr.V.Kannan
ORDER
1. This Criminal Revision Case has been filed, to set aside the order dated, 22.07.2025, made in Crl.MP.No.1089 of 2025 in MC.No.26 of 2022, by the Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi.
2. The facts of the case, in a nutshell, led to filing of this Criminal 1/25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2025 01:30:22 pm ) Crl.RC(MD)No.1222 of 2025 Revision Case and necessary for disposal of the same, are as follows:-
a) The Petitioner, represented by his mother, Jothi, had filed a maintenance case in MC.No.26 of 2022, before the Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi, against the Respondent, seeking maintenance, alleging that though she was legally married to one Subbaiah, who was working abroad and died on 07.10.2020, the Petitioner was born to her through the Respondent, by physical relations by threat and coercion, on several occasions. The Petitioner, who was born on 21.01.2006, represented by his mother, had filed Crl.MP.No.1089 of 2025 in MC.No.26 of 2021, under Section 39 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, seeking a direction to conduct a DNA Test to establish the paternity of the Petitioner, who was minor at that time. Though in all Official Records and school documents, the name of the father of the Petitioner was given as Subbaiah, the Petitioner now claims that he was born through the Respondent herein.
b) The Respondent herein has also filed a counter in the said petition, seeking DNA Test, stating that since the Petitioner was born during the subsistence of the marriage of mother of the Petitioner with Subbaiah, the Petitioner is presumed to be the legitimate son of 2/25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2025 01:30:22 pm ) Crl.RC(MD)No.1222 of 2025 Subbaiah and even the Petitioner, while applying for bail in Cr.No. 126 of 2025, had declared the name of Subbiah as his father in the bail bond and surety documents and hence, DNA Test, as prayed for by the Petitioner, cannot be ordered.
c) By the detailed impugned order, the Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi, had dismissed the said petition, seeking DNA Test, for want of sufficient cause, strong prima facie case, legal justification and supporting materials and relying on the Petitioner's own declarations in the legal documents and also on the ground of long and explained delay of nearly two decades in approaching the Court. As against the same, the Petitioner herein, who now attained majority, has filed this Criminal Revision Case.
3. This court heard Mr.V.Kannan, the learned counsel for the Petitioner and considered his submissions and also perused the entire materials available on record.
4. The learned counsel for the Petitioner has submitted that the Respondent was responsible for the birth of the Petitioner and hence, he is accountable and that since the biological heritage of the Petitioner is in question, the DNA Test is necessarily required to be conducted, as prayed for by the Petitioner, since the DNA Test will give closure to 3/25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2025 01:30:22 pm ) Crl.RC(MD)No.1222 of 2025 the issues in the matter and the future of the Petitioner will depends on the outcome of the DNA Test. The learned counsel further submits that the Petitioner cannot be penalised for the mistakes or errors of his mother in taking necessary legal steps to protect his rights and that the Trial Court erred in passing the impugned order as it did not consider the facts in the matter and also erred in presuming about various points, none of which are attributable to the Petitioner, but only to his mother and thus, the learned counsel prays for allowing this Criminal Revision Case.
5. According to the Petitioner, the mother of the Petitioner was legally married to one Subbaiah, who was working abroad and died on 07.10.2020. The Petitioner was born to her through the Respondent on 21.01.2006. The maintenance case was filed in the year 2022, after the death of her husband, Subbiah in the year 2020. The Petitioner has now attained the age of majority.
6. The Petitioner, represented by his mother, had sought for a direction to conduct a DNA Test to establish his paternity before the Family Court, which was refused by the impugned order. In all the Official Records and school documents, the name of the father of the Petitioner was given as Subbaiah. However, the Petitioner, who now attained the age of 4/25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2025 01:30:22 pm ) Crl.RC(MD)No.1222 of 2025 majority, claims that he was born through the Respondent herein.
7. It was the case of the Respondent before the Family Court that since the Petitioner was born during the subsistence of the marriage of the mother of the Petitioner with Subbaiah, the Petitioner is presumed to be the legitimate son of Subbaiah and hence, the DNA Test, as prayed for by the Petitioner, cannot be ordered and if ordered, his fundamental rights, and right to privacy will be infringed.
8. Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the Petitioner and after perusal of the records, now the legal question involved in the present Criminal Revision Case filed under Sections 438 and 442 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) is relating to examination of certain scientific techniques and principles for adjudication of birth status of the Petitioner herein, namely, DNA (Deoxyribonucleic Acid) Test so that the Courts/Investigating Agencies may arrive at a fair conclusion.
9. To understand this aspect, it is necessary to examine the ratio of balance between efficient investigation and individual rights. Accordingly, Law, Science and Technology have a great relevance in our lives. Law and Science encounter each other in many ways. When technology intrudes in the ambit of legal rights, it is checked by law, for example, cyber 5/25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2025 01:30:22 pm ) Crl.RC(MD)No.1222 of 2025 crimes, in the same manner to protect legal rights and strengthening the evidence with the help of science, cannot be denied.
10.At present days, when the legal system has so much advanced, criminals/litigants/individuals take care to erase all the evidences of their involvement, then in such case, scientific and highly sophisticated methods are required to trace the involvement of criminals/litigants/ individuals. Narcoanalysis, Polygraphy and Brain Mapping tests collectively called deception detection tests (DDT) are new kinds of interrogation techniques including the DNA Test (Deoxyribonuclie Acid), which are simple and civilized way of conducting investigation. But, at the same time, one has to be conscious of its limitations also. It infringes fundamental rights under Article 20(3) of the Constitution of India and also right to privacy and right to health, which are guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
11.In spite of the verily limitations, it affirms certain attributes also which includes: ''order of court', ''pre-consent of subject' ''non-manipulated statements by subject' and ''secure public interest' Thus, there is a tension between desirability of efficient investigation and preservation of individual rights.
6/25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2025 01:30:22 pm ) Crl.RC(MD)No.1222 of 2025
12.Let us understand briefly the Concept Of Investigation:-
In order to study about the investigation, we need to understand the term ''investigation'.
● "Investigation” means to examine, study, or inquire into systematically, search or examine into the particulars of; examine in detail, or, to search out and examine the particulars of in an attempt to learn the facts about something hidden, unique, or complex, especially in an attempt to find a motive, cause, it is about finding things.
13.According to Section 2(1)(l) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS)," investigation includes all the proceedings under this Code for the collection of evidence conducted by a police officer or by any person (other than a magistrate) who is authorized by a Magistrate in this behalf. Investigation, under the BNSS includes:-
1. Proceeding to the spot of crime.
2. Ascertaining the facts and circumstances of the case.
3. Discovery and arrest of the suspected offenders.
4. Collection of evidence, ● examination of various persons including the accused and recording their statements in writing.
● Search of places or seizures of things which are considered necessary.
14.Criminal Investigation is an applied science that involves the study of 7/25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2025 01:30:22 pm ) Crl.RC(MD)No.1222 of 2025 facts, used to identify, locate and prove the guilt of a criminal. A complete criminal investigation can include searching, interviews, interrogations, evidence collection and preservation and various methods of investigation. Modern day criminal investigations commonly employ many modern scientific techniques known collectively as forensic science.
15.Application of science and technology in criminal investigation is also an important issue to be considered:-
The search for effective aids to interrogation is probably as old as man's need to obtain information from an uncooperative source and as persistent as his impatience to shortcut any tortuous path. In the annals of police investigation, physical coercion has at times been substituted for painstaking and time consuming inquiry in the belief that direct methods produce quick results. The use of technology in the service of criminal investigations, and the application of scientific techniques to detect and evaluate criminal evidence has advanced the investigation process criminal justice system throughout the country. According to Cowan in his article "Decision Theory in Law, Science, and Technology", "the aim of science, traditionally put, is to search out the ways 8/25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2025 01:30:22 pm ) Crl.RC(MD)No.1222 of 2025 in which truth may become known. Law aims at the just resolution of human conflict. Truth and justice, we might venture to say, having different aims, use different methods to achieve them. Unfortunately, this convenient account of law and science is itself neither true nor just. For law must know what the truth is within the context of the legal situation: and science finds itself ever engaged in resolving the conflicting claims of theorists putting forward their own competing brands of truth."
16.This quote roughly means that the law needs to find the truth to resolve "human conflict" and one method of doing so is to use the field of science. Today's society has improved upon the methods of the past to bring about more precise and accurate techniques. Forensic Science has expanded to Trauma Inducing Drugs and Psychotropic Substances. The application of science to matters of law has made great strides in recent years. Development of new tools of investigation has led to the emergence of scientific tools of interrogation. Before analyzing these techniques it will be necessary and useful to frame and consider the question of law in this case.
17.What is DNA:-
● Here's a look at what DNA is made of, how it works, who discovered it and other interesting DNA facts. As per the writer Rachael Rettner, DNA stands for deoxyribonucleic acid, which is a molecule that contains the instructions an organism needs to develop, live and 9/25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2025 01:30:22 pm ) Crl.RC(MD)No.1222 of 2025 reproduce. These instructions are found inside every cell and are passed down from parents to their offspring.
● DNA is made up of molecules called nucleotides. Each nucleotide contains a phosphate group, a sugar group and a nitrogen base. The four types of nitrogen bases are adenine (A), thymine (T), guanine (G) and cytosine (C).
● Nucleotides are attached together to form two long strands that spiral to create a structure called a double helix. The double-helix structure as a ladder, the phosphate and sugar molecules would be the sides, while the base pairs would be the rungs. The bases on one strand pair with the bases on another strand: Adenine pairs with thymine (A-T), and guanine pairs with cytosine (G-C).
● Human DNA is made up of around 3 billion base pairs, and more than 99% of those bases are the same in all people, according to the U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM).
● Similar to the way the order of letters in the alphabet can be used to form words, the order of nitrogen bases in a DNA sequence forms genes, which, in the language of the cell, cells tell how to make proteins. The shorthand for this process is that genes "encode"
proteins. But DNA is not the direct template for protein production. To 10/25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2025 01:30:22 pm ) Crl.RC(MD)No.1222 of 2025 make a protein, the cell makes a copy of the gene, using not DNA but ribonucleic acid, or RNA. This RNA copy, called messenger RNA, tells the cell's protein-making machinery which amino acids to string together into a protein, according to "Biochemistry" (W. H. Freeman and Company, 2002).
● DNA molecules are long -- so long, in fact, that they can't fit into cells without the right packaging. To fit inside cells, DNA is coiled tightly to form structures called chromosomes. Each chromosome contains a single DNA molecule. Humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes, which are found inside each cell's nucleus.
● Rosalind Elsie Franklin (1920-1958) was a British chemist and crystallographer who is best known for her role in the discovery of the structure of DNA. DNA was first observed by Swiss biochemist Friedrich Miescher in 1869, according to a paper published in 2005 in the journal Developmental Biology. Miescher used biochemical methods to isolate DNA -- which he called nuclein -- from white blood cells and sperm, and determined that it was very different from protein.
(The term "nucleic acid" derives from "nuclein.") But for many years, researchers did not realize the importance of this molecule.
18.How does DNA function?
11/25https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2025 01:30:22 pm ) Crl.RC(MD)No.1222 of 2025 ● Genes encode proteins that perform all sorts of functions for humans (and other living beings). The human gene HBA1, for example, contains instructions for building the protein alpha globin, which is a component of haemoglobin, the oxygen-carrying protein in red blood cells.
● DNA sequencing involves technology that allows researchers to determine the order of bases in a DNA sequence. The technology can be used to determine the order of bases in genes, chromosomes or an entire genome.
19.The question is whether the DNA Test infringes the fundamental rights under Article 20(3) and also right to privacy and right to health, which are guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
20.A person's DNA contains information about their heritage, and it can sometimes reveal whether they are at an elevated risk for certain diseases. DNA tests, or genetic tests, are used for a variety of reasons, including to diagnose genetic disorders, to determine whether a person is a carrier of a genetic mutation that they could pass on to their children and to examine whether a person is at risk for a genetic disease.
21.Genetic test results can have implications for a person's health, and the 12/25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2025 01:30:22 pm ) Crl.RC(MD)No.1222 of 2025 tests are often provided along with genetic counseling to help individuals understand the results and consequences. People also use the results of genetic testing to find relatives and learn about their family trees.
22.The Constitution of India guarantees every person right against self incrimination under Article 20(3) of the Indian Constitution "No person accused of any offence shall be compelled to be a witness against himself."
23.Thus, Right to Privacy is implicit in the Right to life and liberty guaranteed to the citizens of India by Article 21 of the Constitution of India. None can publish anything covering the above matters without his consent whether truthful or otherwise and whether laudatory or critical. If done so, it will be violating right to privacy of person concerned and would be liable in an action for damages.
24.In reference to the above findings, reliance is being placed on paragraph nos.6,7,8,9,10 and 11 of the judgement passed by Kerala High Court in Crl.Rev.Pet.No.2329 of 2012, Abdurahiman vs. State of Kerala (decided on 10th July, 2013), wherein the Court was pleased to observe as under:-
“6. Learned Public Prosecutor contended that the question of 13/25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2025 01:30:22 pm ) Crl.RC(MD)No.1222 of 2025 paternity does not arise for consideration in an allegation of rape. It is not the paternity of the child that is in issue, but the question is whether the victim has been sexually assaulted. Even assuming that the DNA test goes against the victim, it does not mean that no sexual assault has been committed by the accused. Viewed from any angle, according to the learned Public Prosecutor, there is no scope for DNA test in a trial of a case of rape.
7. The learned Public Prosecutor relied on the decision reported in Babu v. State of Kerala [2013 (2) KHC 526] and pointed out that this Court has elaborately considered the necessity to conduct the DNA test in a case of rape and has come to the conclusion that even assuming that the DNA test is against the accused, that by itself is not a clinching evidence and that has no relevance in determining whether the act committed amounts to a rape or not. In the light of the principle laid down in the said decisions, according to the learned Public Prosecutor, claim made for DNA test has no basis.
8. True, normally, the court will not, as a matter of fact, shut out the evidence which enables the court to determine the truth. But to say that a DNA test is the necessity in a case of rape cannot be accepted. True, in the case on hand, from the deposition produced along with the petition of the defacto complainant, it is seen that she has a case of only a solitary instance of sexual intercourse with the accused as a result of which she claims to have been conceived. This aspect is highlighted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the DNA test is the issue and that should have been allowed.
9. As already noticed, it is not the paternity that is in issue, but whether the act was committed by the accused, and if the act was committed by the accused, whether there was any consent on the part of the victim. Even assuming that the DNA test goes against the defacto complainant, that by itself may not be a ground to hold that the incident has not taken place as alleged by the victim. Sections 7 and 11 on which considerable reliance is placed by the learned counsel for the Petitioner, have no 14/25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2025 01:30:22 pm ) Crl.RC(MD)No.1222 of 2025 application to the facts of the case. They deal with different circumstances and situations altogether. The learned counsel try to contend that the effect of sexual assault is impregnation and therefore, DNA test is relevant. It is not such an act which is contemplated by Sections 7 and 11 as could be clear from the illustrations provided by these Sections. The argument based on Sections 7 and 11 is misconceived.
10. True, in the decisions reported in State of Kerala v.
Ayoob [2005 (2) KLT 441], the court has indicated the relevance of the DNA test. In the decision reported in Krishan Kumar Malik v. State of Haryana [2011 (7) SCC 130], in paragraph 45, it is held as follows:
"45. We have also gone through the orders of dismissal passed by this Court in Crl MP No. 9646 on 15.06.2009 as also of the review petition dated 5.11.2009 filed by Smt. Hardevi. Admittedly, the said orders passed in the SLP and the review petition by this Court did not assign any reasons for the dismissal, thus it would not be proper and safe for us to place reliance thereon."
11. Apart from the fact that in relation to the new provision of Section 53 (A) in Cr.P.C., that decision cannot be taken to lay down principle that in case of rape, DNA test is a must. This Court in the decision referred to by the learned Public Prosecutor has considered the issue elaborately and has held that it is not necessary to go for a DNA test nor can that the result of DNA test is conclusive either way. If that be so, there is no merit in the contention that if the DNA test goes in favour of the Petitioner, he would be exonerated. As rightly pointed out by the learned Public Prosecutor, the issue is one whether the act is alleged to have been committed by the Petitioner is with consent or not and not whether the child is that of the Petitioner. Following the principles laid down in the decision rendered by the Division Bench of this Court referred to by the learned Public Prosecutor, it is held that the court below was justified in declining to grant relief to the Petitioner for DNA test though for different reasons.” 15/25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2025 01:30:22 pm ) Crl.RC(MD)No.1222 of 2025
25.The DNA evidence, no doubt has the ability to increase the accuracy of verdicts in trials. But this does not mean that we should be complacent about its use and presentation. DNA will create a comprehensive database eventually resulting in a human data bank of DNA publicly accessible and tremendously utilized in investigations.
26.In the present case, the Petitioner was born on 21.01.2006. The Petitioner through her mother has come forward with the maintenance case in the year 2022, which is after the death of her husband, Subbaiah on 07.10.2020 and after an inordinate delay of more than 15 years. The mother of the Petitioner ought to have approached the court at the initial stage itself. At least, the application, seeking DNA Test ought to have been filed immediately after filing of the maintenance case. There is also a lapse of more than two years. No satisfactory explanation has been given by the Petitioner for such an inordinate delay.
27.Though the mother of the Petitioner made allegations of physical relationship by force or threat, that too on many occasions, she did not make any complaint to the concerned authority against the Respondent.
28.As per Section 116 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, any person born during the continuance of a valid marriage between his 16/25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2025 01:30:22 pm ) Crl.RC(MD)No.1222 of 2025 mother and any man, or within two hundred and eighty days after its dissolution, the mother remaining unmarried, shall be conclusive proof that he is the legitimate child of that man, unless it can be shown that the parties to the marriage had no access to each other at any time when he could have been begotton.
29.The language of the said provision makes it clear that there exists a strong presumption that the husband is the father of the child borne by his wife during the subsistence of their marriage. The object of this principle is to prevent any unwarranted enquiry into the paternity of a child.
30. In the present case, the Petitioner has failed to establish non-access. Admittedly, the husband of mother of Petitioner, namely, Subbaiah was very much alive till 2020, and no material has been placed before this Court to disprove access between them in the relevant period before the birth of child. Further, in various proceedings, the Petitioner was declared to be the son of Subbiah, which would go against the case of the Petitioner. Further, in all Official Records and School Documents, the name of the father of the Petitioner was given as Subbaiah and even while applying for bail in Cr.No.126 of 2005, he had declared the name as Subbaiah as his father in the bail bond and surety documents. 17/25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2025 01:30:22 pm ) Crl.RC(MD)No.1222 of 2025
31.The Honourable Supreme Court, in the case of Ivan Rathinam Vs Milan Joseph, (2025 INSC 115) has clearly held that DNA tests cannot be directed, unless a strong prima facie case is made out and that such tests should not be ordered as a matter of routine. Courts must be cautious in directing DNA tests, as such orders can have far reaching effects on the dignity and privacy of individuals. For better appreciation, it is necessary to mention the relevant portion of the judgement as under:-
“30. It is only when such an assertion is made, that the court can consider the question of ordering a DNA test to establish paternity. In Goutam Kundu v. State of W.B. 1993 (3) SCC
418. (supra), this Court laid down the following parameters to decide whether a court can order a DNA test for the purposes of Section 112:-
(1) that courts in India cannot order blood test as a matter of course;
(2) wherever applications are made for such prayers in order to have roving inquiry, the prayer for blood cannot be entertained.
(3) There must be a strong prima facie case in that the husband must establish non- access in order to dispel the presumption arising under Section 112 of the Evidence Act.
(4) The court must carefully examine as to what would be the consequence of ordering the blood test; whether it will have the effect of branding a child as a bastard and the mother as an unchaste woman.18/25
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2025 01:30:22 pm ) Crl.RC(MD)No.1222 of 2025 (5) No one can be compelled to give sample of blood for analysis.
32.The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in Criminal Appeal No.1267 of 2004, Smt. Selvi and others vs. State of Karnataka (decided on 5th May, 2010) was pleased to observe in paragraph nos. 221, 222 and 223 of the judgement, as under:-
“221. In our considered opinion, the compulsory administration of the impugned techniques violates the `right against self- incrimination'. This is because the underlying rationale of the said right is to ensure the reliability as well as voluntariness of statements that are admitted as evidence. This Court has recognised that the protective scope of Article 20(3) extends to the investigative stage in criminal cases and when read with Section 161(2) of Cr.PC, 1973 it protects accused persons, suspects as well as witnesses who are examined during an investigation. The test results cannot be admitted in evidence if they have been obtained through the use of compulsion. Article 20(3) protects an individual's choice between speaking and remaining silent, irrespective of whether the subsequent testimony proves to be inculpatory or exculpatory. Article 20(3) aims to prevent the forcible `conveyance of personal knowledge that is relevant to the facts in issue'. The results obtained from each of the impugned tests bear a `testimonial' character and they cannot be categorised as material evidence.
222. We are also of the view that forcing an individual to undergo any of the impugned techniques violates the standard of `substantive due process' which is required for restraining personal liberty. Such a violation will occur irrespective of whether these techniques are forcibly administered during the course of an investigation or for any other purpose since the test results could also expose a person to adverse consequences of a non-penal nature. The impugned techniques cannot be read into 19/25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2025 01:30:22 pm ) Crl.RC(MD)No.1222 of 2025 the statutory provisions which enable medical examination during investigation in criminal cases, i.e. the Explanation to Sections 53, 53A and 54 of Cr.PC, 1973. Such an expansive interpretation is not feasible in light of the rule of `ejusdem generis' and the considerations which govern the interpretation of statutes in relation to scientific advancements. We have also elaborated how the compulsory administration of any of these techniques is an unjustified intrusion into the mental privacy of an individual. It would also amount to `cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment' with regard to the language of evolving international human rights norms. Furthermore, placing reliance on the results gathered from these techniques comes into conflict with the `right to fair trial'. Invocations of a compelling public interest cannot justify the dilution of constitutional rights such as the `right against self-incrimination'.
223. In light of these conclusions, we hold that no individual should be forcibly subjected to any of the techniques in question, whether in the context of investigation in criminal cases or otherwise. Doing so would amount to an unwarranted intrusion into personal liberty. However, we do leave room for the voluntary administration of the impugned techniques in the context of criminal justice, provided that certain safeguards are in place. Even when the subject has given consent to undergo any of these tests, the test results by themselves cannot be admitted as evidence because the subject does not exercise conscious control over the responses during the administration of the test. However, any information or material that is subsequently discovered with the help of voluntary administered test results can be admitted, in accordance with Section 27 of the Evidence Act, 1872.”
33.By applying the above said principles, laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court, in the present case, this Court does not find any strong prima facie case to allow the request for DNA testing. Further, the Petitioner has not produced a single piece of documentary evidence 20/25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2025 01:30:22 pm ) Crl.RC(MD)No.1222 of 2025 before this Court to even prima facie support his claim that the Respondent is the biological father of the Petitioner. In the absence of any such evidence, this Court finds it difficult to even presume that a prima facie case exists. As held by the Honourable Supreme Court, DNA tests cannot be ordered merely on vague allegations unless a strong prima facie case is established.
34.It is further observed that these pscho-medicl tests are violative in character but at the same time individual interest cant be placed above collective interest. Let us fulfill the dream of having crime free society and the maxim "Jura publica anteferendaprivatis juribus" should be followed meaning thereby "public rights are to be preferred to private rights whenever there being a dilemma between individual liberties and security of public interest. The Forensic science is defined as the application of science in answering questions that are of legal interest. More specifically, forensic scientists employ techniques and tools to interpret crime scene evidence, and use that information in investigations.
35.It is also seen that the mother of the Petitioner has remained completely silent from 2005 until 2022, the year in which she filed the maintenance case regarding the alleged paternity of her child. Even in 2022, she did 21/25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2025 01:30:22 pm ) Crl.RC(MD)No.1222 of 2025 not immediately seek for DNA testing, but came forward with the present application much belatedly. No reasonable or acceptable explanation has been provided as to why she remained silent for nearly 20 years after the alleged incident. If the threats were as severe as alleged, it would be natural for any woman to either report the matter to police. It is seen that she did not make any such complaint to the authority concerned. Her complete silence over two decades only raises further doubts on the genuineness of claim of the Petitioner, who is her son.
36.Moreover, it is well settled by the Honourable Supreme Court and the High Court that a DNA test, though a scientific tool, intrudes into the personal domain and has the potential to violate the right to privacy guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. In sensitive matters involving allegations of paternity, such tests cannot be ordered as a matter of course. Unless the Petitioner satisfies the initial burden of proof and establishes a strong prima facie case, such an intrusive test cannot be permitted. In the present case, this initial requirement has not been met.
37.Further, in the context of the present case, this Court is of the view that the DNA Test, as prayed for by the Petitioner, will infringe the 22/25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2025 01:30:22 pm ) Crl.RC(MD)No.1222 of 2025 fundamental rights of the Respondent.
38.Therefore, this Court is of the firm view that the Petitioner has not made out any sufficient cause or legal justification to allow the prayer sought for under Section 39 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam. The delay in filing, failure to prove non-access, the Petitioner's own declarations in the legal documents, and the legal presumption under Section 116 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, all weigh heavily against the Petitioner.
39.This Court finds that the Petitioner has failed to establish a prima facie case for directing a DNA test. The long and unexplained delay of nearly two decades, absence of any documentary or supporting material, the legal presumption of legitimacy under Section 116 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, and the privacy concerns involved all weigh heavily against the claim of the Petitioner. Therefore, no case is made out by the Petitioner for interference by this Court exercising power under Sections 438 and 442 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) for the relief claimed. The Trial Court had rightly dismissed the case of the Petitioner by the impugned order, dated 22.07.2025, by a reasoned and speaking order.
40.In view of the above said discussions and in the light of the decisions 23/25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2025 01:30:22 pm ) Crl.RC(MD)No.1222 of 2025 referred to above, the prayer in the present case for quashing of the impugned order dated, 22.07.2025 made in Crl.MP.No.1089 of 2025 in MC.No.26 of 2022, by the Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi, refusing to give a direction to conduct the DNA Test, is liable to be rejected, as there is no merit in this Criminal Revision Case filed by the Petitioner.
41.In the result, this Criminal Revision Cases is dismissed. There is no order as to costs. The file is consigned to record.
03.09.2025 Index:Yes/No Web:Yes/No Speaking/Non Speaking Neutral Citation Srcm To
1. The Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi 24/25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2025 01:30:22 pm ) Crl.RC(MD)No.1222 of 2025 SHAMIM AHMED, J.
Srcm Crl.RC(MD)No.1222 of 2025 03.09.2025 25/25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2025 01:30:22 pm )