Man finds messages.
Gets a DNA test.
Result allegedly shows 0 percent chance the child is his.
Family Court agrees to official testing.
High Court agrees too.
Then Supreme Court steps in and says:
A husband cannot use the child as a tool to prove adultery.
A wife refusing DNA test cannot be presumed guilty.
And a child born during marriage remains legally legitimate unless husband proves no access at conception.
The husband was then ordered to pay ₹1 lakh.
So in modern India:
A man can raise a child that may not be biologically his,
suspect paternity,
bring private DNA evidence,
and still be told the law values “presumption” over proof.
Question for the timeline:
Should paternity truth matter less than preserving legal legitimacy?