IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.6254 of 2009 Date of decision : 29.10.2009 Bahadur Singh … Petitioner Versus Heera Singh and others …Respondents CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL Present: Mr.Arun Yadav, Advocate for the petitioner. A.N.Jindal, J. (Oral) AT the stage of rebuttal and arguments in the trial Court, the petitioner moved an application for performing D.N.A. test of the plaintiff and performa-defendants No.14 and 15 in order to ascertain whether they are born out of the wed lock of Imrati and Ram Chander. The application filed by the defendants/petitioners was dismissed with the following observations:- “Heard A perusal of the case file shows that the defendants have examined as many as 15 witnesses to rebut the claim of the plaintiff. The defendants have availed sufficient opportunities to lead their evidence. Moreover, it has been held in various judicial pronouncements that DNA test is not to be directed as a matter of routine and such direction should be given only in deserving cases. Further, the process of court cannot be used to create evidence. However, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this court is of the view that both the parties have plaed on record sufficient evidence, after the appreciation of which, the suit can be effectively disposed of. For these reasons, the judgments cited by the applicants/defendants are not applicable to the facts and circumstanes of the present case. Furthermore, the defendants’ evidence was closed on 18.12.2008 and thereafter the suit has been pending for rebuttal evidence, if any and for arguments. Therefore, this court is of the opinion that the present application has certainly been filed at a belated stage. CR No.6254 of 2009 The present suit pertains to the year 2001 and if the present application is allowed, it will certainly lead to an unnecessary delay in the disposal of the suit.” Hon’ble Apex Court though is not averse to the DNA test but it rrecommends only the appropriate cases. It was observed in case Banarsi Dass Vs. Teeku Dutta and another, 2005 (3) ALD 78 (SC) as under:- “The trial Court erroneously held that the documents produced by the respondents were not sufficient or relevant for the purpose of adjudication and DNA Test was conclusive. This is not a correct view. It is for the parties to place evidence in support of their respective claims and establish their stands. DNA Test is not to be directed as a matter of routine and only in deserving cases such a direction can be given, as was noted in Goutam Kundu’s case. Present case does not fall to the category. High Court’s judgment does not suffer from any infirmity. We, therefore, uphold it. It is made clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case relating to succession application.” Thus it is well settled by now that DNA is not a sure test and the relationship could be proved by way of evidence as required under Section 50 of the Indian Evidence Act. Even otherwise, no such document has been placed on record in order to establish that the requirement of DNA Test was essential. As such petition is dismissed. [ A.N.Jindal ] Judge 29.10.2009 sd 2