LHC rejects plea for DNA test in paternity case

Upholding the decision of district courts, the Lahore High Court (LHC) has dismissed an application for the determination of a girl child's paternity through DNA test to safeguard her dignity, privacy and protect her from emotional harm.

"The role of the court is not only to decide legal disputes but also to protect human dignity, especially where the rights of a minor are involved," LHC Justice Syed Ahsan Raza Kazmi observed by presiding over the Multan Bench.

"When scientific tools like DNA testing are used to resolve questions of paternity, the court must act with caution. A child may not be able to speak for herself, but she still has constitutional rights such as the right to privacy, dignity, and protection from emotional harm," the judge observed.

"The law places the child's welfare above all other concerns. Even if both parents agree to a DNA test, the court must still consider whether such a test is in the best interest of the child," Justice Kazmi declared.

Petitioner Malik Hamid Raza had filed the application seeking DNA test of the girl, citing prolonged absence of cohabitation with her mother. The respondent woman had consented to the child's test.

Nonetheless, the trial court dismissed the application on April 17.

The petitioner filed an appeal, which was also dismissed.

Then he challenged the orders before the LHC Multan Bench.

Justice Kazmi observed that it is the consistent view of the Supreme Court of Pakistan that DNA tests cannot be conducted in civil matters without the consent of parties. However, this case presented a unique configuration where both the father (petitioner) and mother (respondent) had expressed willingness for the girl to undergo a DNA test to determine the paternity.

The key issue in this case was whether a court should order a DNA test of a minor to determine paternity when both parties had given their consent in order to determine paternity.

Given that the minor was unable to defend herself or give consent, it was imperative that the court exercise extra caution when dealing with matters concerning her welfare and interests.

The court must take a proactive and protective role to ensure that the minor's rights are safeguarded and her best interests are prioritized, the court observed.

"Though the parents, as natural guardians, can generally provide consent on behalf of a minor, this principle is not absolute. This court as well as the Supreme Court of Pakistan in a number of cases has held that when a minor's interests are at stake in litigation, the court may override parental consent if it observes that such consent is not in the best interest of the minor. The court's primary consideration is the welfare of minors, and it may intervene to protect the rights of minors even if it means setting aside parental decisions and wishes," Justice Kazmi observed.

"The use of DNA testing in legal proceedings, particularly in matters of paternity, is a serious judicial act, not to be undertaken lightly or on mere request. It is not the availability of technology or the consent of parties that alone justifies such testing, but whether its purpose truly serves the ends of justice. DNA tests may have valued, but not at the cost of a child's mental and emotional well-being," he observed.

The LHC declared that the district courts had rightly held that at this preliminary stage, the application was premature, particularly when evidence of the parties was yet to be recorded. Furthermore, it has, by now, been well-settled that DNA evidence is not conclusive rather it serves as corroborative evidence.