Aparna Firodia v. Ajinkya Firodia
“Children's Right to Privacy: When DNA Tests Cannot Be Ordered”
TL;DR
The Supreme Court ruled that DNA tests cannot be routinely ordered in matrimonial disputes to prove adultery. Children have the right not to have their legitimacy questioned frivolously—this is part of their privacy rights. A DNA test can only be ordered when there is strong prima facie evidence to rebut the presumption of legitimacy under Section 112 of the Evidence Act.
The Bottom Line
Courts cannot order DNA tests of children just to prove a spouse's adultery. The child's welfare and privacy must come first. DNA tests should only be ordered when absolutely necessary and when there's strong evidence suggesting non-access.
Case Timeline
The journey from FIR to Supreme Court verdict
Marriage
Aparna and Ajinkya got married according to Hindu rites in Pune
Marriage
Aparna and Ajinkya got married according to Hindu rites in Pune
First Child Born
Master "Y" was born
First Child Born
Master "Y" was born
Second Child Born
Master "X" was born
Second Child Born
Master "X" was born
Private DNA Test
Husband obtained a private DNA test report
Private DNA Test
Husband obtained a private DNA test report
Divorce Petition Filed
Husband filed for divorce on grounds of adultery with prayer for DNA test
Divorce Petition Filed
Husband filed for divorce on grounds of adultery with prayer for DNA test
Family Court Order
Family Court allowed the application for DNA testing
Family Court Order
Family Court allowed the application for DNA testing
High Court Upholds Order
Bombay High Court upheld the Family Court order for DNA test
High Court Upholds Order
Bombay High Court upheld the Family Court order for DNA test
Supreme Court Judgment
Supreme Court set aside the orders, held DNA test not in child's best interest
Supreme Court Judgment
Supreme Court set aside the orders, held DNA test not in child's best interest
The Story
Aparna Ajinkya Firodia (wife) and Ajinkya Arun Firodia (husband) got married on 23rd November 2005 according to Hindu rites in Pune. They had two sons: Master "Y" born on 21st December 2009, and Master "X" born on 17th July 2013.
In June 2017, Ajinkya filed for divorce before the Family Court on the ground of adultery and sought a direction for a DNA test to establish the paternity of Master "X". He alleged that his wife had committed adultery and that the younger child was not his biological son.
Prior to approaching the court, the husband had apparently gotten a private DNA test conducted in November 2016, which reportedly indicated that he was not the biological father of Master "X". Based on this, he sought a court-ordered DNA test.
The Family Court, Pune, allowed the husband's application for DNA testing on 12th August 2021. The High Court of Bombay upheld this order on 22nd November 2021.
Aggrieved by these orders, the wife Aparna approached the Supreme Court challenging the direction for DNA testing, arguing that such a test was not in the best interest of the child and was being sought merely to prove allegations of adultery against her.
Legal Issues
Click each question to reveal the Supreme Court's answer
Arguments
The battle of arguments before the Supreme Court
Petitioner
Vihaan Kumar
DNA test not in child's best interest
The DNA test was being sought not to determine parentage but to prove allegations of adultery against the wife. This would harm the child psychologically and socially.
Child's right to privacy
The child has an independent right to privacy which includes not having his legitimacy questioned frivolously.
No evidence of non-access
The husband has not provided any evidence of "non-access" as required by Section 112 of the Evidence Act. The parties were living together during the relevant period.
Private DNA test inadmissible
The privately obtained DNA test was conducted without the wife's knowledge or court permission and should not be relied upon.
Respondent
State of Haryana
Right to know the truth
The husband has a right to know the true paternity of the child, especially when he has grounds to believe the child is not his.
Private DNA test as prima facie evidence
The private DNA test report indicating 0% probability of paternity provides sufficient basis to order a court-supervised DNA test.
Justice requires truth
Courts should not allow a party to escape the consequences of adultery by hiding behind the presumption of legitimacy.
Court's Analysis
How the Court reasoned its decision
The Supreme Court conducted a thorough analysis balancing the competing interests—the husband's right to prove adultery, the wife's right to reputation, and most importantly, the child's welfare and privacy. The Court emphasized that children are not objects to be subjected to forensic testing and that their best interest must be the paramount consideration.
Children have the right not to have their legitimacy questioned frivolously before a Court of Law. This is an essential attribute of the right to privacy.
Establishes children's independent privacy rights in matrimonial litigation.
Courts are required to acknowledge that children are not to be regarded like material objects, and be subjected to forensic/DNA testing, particularly when they are not parties to the divorce proceeding.
Sets a protective standard for children in parental disputes.
DNA tests of minor children shall not be conducted routinely in case of matrimonial disputes unless there is no other way of proving infidelity.
Makes DNA testing a last resort, not a routine measure.
A DNA test of children who were born during the existence of marriage can only be ordered when there is strong and reliable prima facie evidence to rebut the presumption contemplated under Section 112 of the Evidence Act.
Sets the evidentiary threshold for ordering DNA tests.
The Verdict
Relief Granted
The Supreme Court protected the child from being subjected to DNA testing, recognizing that the primary motive was to prove adultery rather than to determine parentage in the child's interest.
Directions Issued
- The husband-respondent shall pay costs of Rs. 1 Lakh to the wife-appellant
- DNA test shall not be conducted on the minor child
- The divorce proceedings may continue based on other available evidence
Key Legal Principles Established
DNA tests cannot be ordered routinely in matrimonial disputes—they should be a last resort.
Children have the right not to have their legitimacy questioned frivolously—this is part of their privacy rights.
The "best interest of the child" must be the paramount consideration in any order affecting children.
Section 112 of the Evidence Act creates a strong presumption of legitimacy that can only be rebutted by proving "non-access".
Courts must consider the consequences of DNA tests on children—including social stigma, inheritance issues, and psychological harm.
Children are not parties to divorce proceedings and should not be treated as material objects for forensic testing.
When adultery can be proved through other available evidence, DNA testing should not be ordered.
Key Takeaways
What different people should know from this case
- Your child born during marriage is presumed to be legitimate—this is a strong legal presumption.
- DNA tests cannot be ordered just because one spouse alleges adultery.
- Your child has privacy rights that are protected even in divorce disputes.
- Courts will consider your child's welfare before ordering any DNA test.
- If you're facing a similar situation, the other party must prove "non-access" (that you had no opportunity to conceive together) before a DNA test can be ordered.
Legal Framework
Applicable laws and provisions
Constitutional Provisions
Article 21
Constitution of India
“No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.”
Relevance: The Court held that children's right to privacy (including not having legitimacy questioned frivolously) is part of Article 21.
Statutory Provisions
Section 112
Indian Evidence Act, 1872
“The fact that any person was born during the continuance of a valid marriage between his 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 son 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 begotten.”
Relevance: Core provision creating presumption of legitimacy—can only be rebutted by proving "non-access".
Section 13(1)(i)
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
“Any marriage solemnized, whether before or after the commencement of this Act, may, on a petition presented by either the husband or the wife, be dissolved by a decree of divorce on the ground that the other party has, after the solemnization of the marriage, had voluntary sexual intercourse with any person other than his or her spouse.”
Relevance: Ground of adultery for divorce—but adultery can be proved through means other than DNA testing of children.
Related Cases & Precedents
Nandlal Wasudeo Badwaik v. Lata Nandlal Badwaik
cited(2014) 2 SCC 576
Held that when there is conflict between presumption under Section 112 and DNA test results, the court should consider which better serves justice. However, DNA test should not be ordered routinely.
Bhabani Prasad Jena v. Convenor Secretary, Orissa State Commission for Women
cited(2010) 8 SCC 633
Held that courts should be extremely careful before directing DNA tests and must balance the child's interest with truth-finding.
Sharda v. Dharmpal
cited(2003) 4 SCC 493
Laid down that medical examination including DNA test can be ordered but such power should be exercised with caution.
K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India
cited(2017) 10 SCC 1
Nine-Judge Bench recognized right to privacy as a fundamental right—used to derive children's privacy rights in this case.
Watch & Learn
Video explanations in multiple languages
Kannada
Aparna Firodia v. Ajinkya Firodia Case Explained in Kannada
English
Aparna Firodia v. Ajinkya Firodia Case Explained in English
Tamil
Aparna Firodia v. Ajinkya Firodia Case Explained in Tamil
Telugu
Aparna Firodia v. Ajinkya Firodia Case Explained in Telugu
Hindi
Aparna Firodia v. Ajinkya Firodia Case Explained in Hindi
Frequently Asked Questions
Explore Related Cases
More case summaries on similar legal topics
Vihaan Kumar v. State of Haryana
2025 INSC 162
The Case That Made Silence During Arrest Unconstitutional
Shajan Skaria v. State of Kerala
2024 INSC 625
When Criticism of a Public Figure Doesn't Become a Caste Atrocity
Omkar Gond v. Union of India
2024 INSC 775
Disability Percentage Cannot Automatically Deny Your Dream of Becoming a Doctor
Just Rights for Children v. S. Harish
2024 INSC 714
Watching Child Pornography is NOT Just "Moral Decay" — It's a Serious Crime
DISCLAIMER: This case summary is for educational and informational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice. For advice on your specific situation, please consult a qualified advocate. JurisOptima is not responsible for any actions taken based on this information.
Facing aSimilar Situation?
Our advocates can help you understand how this judgment applies to your case.