LAHORE:
In defending the decision of the District Courts, the Superior Court of Lahore (LHC) has dismissed a request for the determination of the paternity of a girl through the DNA test to safeguard their dignity, privacy and protect her from emotional damage.
“The role of the Court is not only to decide legal disputes but also to protect human dignity, especially when the rights of a minor are involved,” LHC Judge Syed Ahsan Ahsan Raza Kazmi observed when presiding over the Fine Bank.
“When scientific tools such as DNA tests are used to resolve paternity issues, the court must act with caution. A child may not be able to speak for itself, but still has constitutional rights, such as the right to privacy, dignity and protection against emotional damage,” the judge observed.
“The law places the child’s welfare over all other concerns. Even if both parents agree a DNA test, the court must still consider whether this evidence is the best for the child,” Judge Kazmi said.
The petitioner Malik Hamid Raza had submitted the application in search of the girl’s DNA test, citing prolonged absence of coexistence with her mother. The woman surveyed had consented to the child’s test.
However, the Court of First Instance dismissed the application on April 17.
The petitioner presented an appeal, which was also dismissed.
Then he challenged the orders before the LHC Fine Bank.
Judge Kazmi observed that it is the constant vision of the Pakistan Supreme Court that DNA tests cannot be carried out in civil matters without the consent of the parties. However, this case presented a unique configuration in which both the father (petitioner) and the mother (surveyed) had expressed her disposition to the girl to submit to a DNA test to determine 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 to determine paternity.
Since the minor could not defend himself or give his consent, it was imperative for the court to have greater caution when dealing with matters related to their well -being and interest.
The Court must assume a proactive and protective role to ensure that the rights of the minor are safeguarded and prioritize their best interests, the court observed.
“Although parents, as natural guardians, can generally give their consent in the name of a minor, this principle is not absolute. This court and the Pakistan Supreme Court in several cases have argued that when the interests of a minor are at stake in the litigation, the court can cancel the consent of the parents if it is observed that such consent is not the best interest of the minor. “Judge Kazmi observed.
“The use of DNA tests in legal procedures, particularly in paternity matters, is a serious judicial act, which should not be carried out lightly or in mere application. It is not the availability of technology or the consent of the parties that only justifies said test, but if its purpose really serves the purposes of justice. DNA will have valued, but not low cost of children and the mental and emotional well -being. of justice.
The LHC declared that the district courts had argued that at this preliminary stage, the application was premature, particularly when evidence of the parties had not yet been recorded. In addition, it has already been well established that DNA evidence is not conclusive, but serves as corroborative evidence.
