- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27439 WP No. 24408 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 24408 OF 2022 (GM-FC) BETWEEN: ROOPA DEVI, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, D/O. MAHADEVAIAH, W/O. C. SANJAY BABU, NO.2005, 1ST CROSS, 3RD STAGE, BEHIND MANANDAVADI ROAD, SRIRAMPURA, MYSURU-570 008. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VINAYA KEERTHY. M, ADVOCATE) AND: C. SANJAY BABU, S/O. LATE CHANNABASAVAIAH, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, NO.167, EWS, RS NAIDU NAGAR, MYSURU-570 007. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. V.B. SIDDARAMAIAH, ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 16.11.2022 ON I.A.NO.4/2022 PASSED BY THE LEARNED IV ADDL. PRL. FAMILY JUDGE, MYSOORU IN M.C.584/2020 IN I.A.NO.4/2022 ANNEXURE-F AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27439 WP No. 24408 of 2022 ORAL ORDER Aggrieved by the order passed in I.A.No.4 in M.C.No.584/2020 dated 16.11.2022 by the IV Addl. Principal Judge, Family Court, Mysuru, whereby the Family Court had allowed the application filed by the husband under Order 26 Rule 10(a) of CPC Read with Section 45 of Indian Evidence Act to prove his case by way of a DNA test, the wife is before this Court. 2. The parties are referred to as husband and wife for the sake of convenience. 3. It is the case of the husband that he had filed M.C. No.584/2020 seeking divorce on the ground of adultery. It is his case that basing on the conversation between the wife and an unknown person which was recorded and exhibited before the Family Court as Ex.P.4, clearly shows that the child is not born in the wedlock. Further, even before filing the case, she has accepted that she is having extra marital relationship. In fact, a test was conducted which reveals that the respondent is not the father of the child, but the same was denied by the wife as such the husband had come up with the instant application. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27439 WP No. 24408 of 2022 The wife had filed her objections to the application and the Family Court by order impugned had allowed the same. 4. While allowing the application, the Family Court had observed that after hearing the phone conversation between the wife and the unknown person and also the wife and husband as recorded in Ex.P.4 C.D., the Family Court is of the clear view that the wife had clearly admitted her extra marital sexual relationship with some other person. Hence, in those circumstances, the Family Court had felt that it is just and necessary to order for a DNA test to find out the paternity of the child. The Family Court had further observed that it is highly difficult to adjudicate the issue otherwise. The Family Court felt that in the facts and circumstances, it is necessary to get the DNA test done. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/wife submits that the child cannot be made to undergo this test and even according to the husband earlier already the test was done. It is submitted that just because the wife is speaking to an unknown person that itself cannot be a basis for the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27439 WP No. 24408 of 2022 husband to come up with this kind of application and in the light of the settled law such application cannot be allowed. 6. Learned counsel for the respondent/husband submits that in fact, even before filing of all these cases, the wife had accepted and the child had undergone the DNA test and as per the same, it revealed that the respondent/husband is not the father of the child. Now, she turned around denying the same and this is the only mode through which he would be able to prove that the wife is living in adultery. It is further submitted that the Family Court had rightly considered and allowed the application and no interference is called for. 7. Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the material on record. The M.C.584/2020 is filed seeking divorce on the ground of adultery. The husband had already filed certain audio tapes before the Family Court and by listening to the C.D. i.e., Ex.P.4, the Family Court had come to the conclusion that as per the same, the wife had admitted her extra marital relationship. Considering the case of the husband that already in the earlier occasion, the DNA test revealed that he is not the father of the child, it attains more significance and - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27439 WP No. 24408 of 2022 in those circumstances, the best scientific evidence has to be in place. The Family Court had rightly considered and passed the order and this Court finds no reasons to interfere with the well considered order passed by the Family Court. Hence, this Court deems it appropriate to pass the following: ORDER i. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. ii. All I.As., in the writ petition shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE BN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 186