IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT MONDAY, THE 15TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 24TH BHADRA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 868 of 2008() ------------------------ ORDER DT.26.11.07 IN CRL.M.A.NO.296/07 IN CRL.M.C.NO.5/07 OF J.F.C.M, ANDROTT PETITIONER: RESPONDENT ---------------------- THACHERY MOHAMMED BASHEER, S/O.MOODAMPRA ABOOSALA, ANDROTT ISLAND, U T OF LAKSHADWEEP. BY ADV. SRI.RAFFEEKH.K RESPONDENTS: PETITIONER ----------------------- 1. MOODAPURA RASHEED KHAN (MINOR), S/O.BALARMABI MOODAMPURA, ANDROTT ISLAND, U T OF LAKSHADWEEP, (REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER AND GUARDIAN MOODAMPURA BALARMABI). 2. MELECHETTA HAMZAKOYA, MELECHETTA HOUSE, MACHERY, ANDROTT, U T OF LAKSHADWEEP. 3. KUNHIKOYA.K., CHEMACHERY, PUNNACHADA, CHEMACHERY, ANDROTT, U T OF LAKSHADWEEP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J. ---------------------- Crl.M.C.No.868 of 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of September 2008 O R D E R Against the petitioner, the first respondent represented by his mother and guardian, had filed a claim under Section 125 Cr.P.C. It was asserted that there was a valid marriage and the first respondent was born in such matrimony. But the mother of the claimant was allegedly divorced even before the claimant was born. The petitioner denied marriage and paternity. In these circumstances, the claimant/minor filed an application for getting the DNA test conducted so that the controversy could be authentically resolved. That application, though opposed, was allowed by the learned Magistrate by the impugned order. 2. The petitioner claims to be aggrieved by the impugned order and has come to this court to assail the impugned order. It is contended that there is absolutely no material to compel the petitioner to subject himself to a DNA test. The allegations are totally incorrect and false. The petitioner is not willing to undergo a DNA test in these Crl.M.C.No.868/08 2 circumstances. It is prayed that the impugned order may in these circumstances be set aside. 3. I have considered all the relevant submissions. Obviously the petitioner is not mulcted with any liability to meet the expenses of the DNA test. I have no hesitation to agree that the DNA test which has been held to be authentic, would go a long way to satisfactorily resolve the controversy. The direction to undergo the DNA test, I am satisfied, does not result in any failure or miscarriage of justice as to persuade this court to invoke the extraordinary inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Of course, it would have been better if the learned Magistrate had waited for some time and had permitted the parties to adduce evidence before disposing of the application to get the DNA test conducted. Be that as it may, I am not persuaded to agree that the impugned order suffers from any vice which would justify or warrant invocation of the extraordinary inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Any and every error or inadequacy in an order passed by a subordinate court will not ipso facto persuade this court to invoke the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. In the facts Crl.M.C.No.868/08 3 and circumstances of this case, I am satisfied that the impugned order does only serve the interests of justice as the controversy can be authentically resolved. As rightly observed by the learned Magistrate, a DNA test report may even be advantageous and beneficial to the petitioner if truth is on his side. In any view of the matter, I am not persuaded to agree that the impugned order does warrant interference invoking the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 4. This Crl.M.C is accordingly dismissed. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) jsr Crl.M.C.No.868/08 4 Crl.M.C.No.868/08 5 R.BASANT, J. CRL.M.C.No. of 2008 ORDER 09/07/2008