ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court has overturned a lower court order directing a DNA test to determine the parentage of a petitioner, holding that such directions, when issued without strong legal grounds, violate the constitutional right to privacy and human dignity.
In this regard, the apex court accepted an appeal filed by Khalid Hameed and set aside earlier rulings of the Anti-Corruption Court in Pakpattan and the Lahore High Court.
The court ruled that unnecessary challenges to a person’s paternity result in social embarrassment, humiliation and severe psychological harm, and therefore must be avoided.
Furthermore, the matter arose from an inheritance dispute in which a special judge of the Anti-Corruption Court, Pakpattan, on November 3, 2022, ordered DNA tests of the petitioner and one Mohammad Haneef.
The trial court had finalized that the central issue in the case concerned the petitioner’s paternity. The petitioner challenged the order before the Lahore High Court, which dismissed the revision petition on December 6, 2022.
Moreover, the case involved allegations of forgery and corruption against several respondents, who were accused of materially altering the petitioner’s parentage in official educational records in an attempt to deprive him of his lawful inheritance.
In this sense, the Supreme Court observed that compelling a DNA test without sufficient justification casts serious aspersions on the character and moral integrity of the mother.
Justice Kakar noted that the top court has consistently held such an approach to be impermissible, as it intrudes into the sanctity of family life and damages a woman’s reputation. The judgement focused on that the right to privacy, guaranteed under Article 14 of the Constitution, protects individuals from unwarranted interference in their personal lives.
The court further held that genetic information is extremely sensitive, containing detailed data about lineage and physical characteristics.
The judgement also linked the right to privacy with the right to liberty under Article 9, noting that liberty includes freedom from arbitrary and purposeless restraints on personal autonomy.
Meanwhile, a judicial order for DNA testing without legal justification, the court concluded, is not a minor procedural lapse but an action with far-reaching consequences for an individual’s dignity, reputation and life.
The Supreme Court warned that misuse or unauthorised disclosure of genetic information could cause serious personal and professional harm, underlining the need for courts to exercise restraint in matters involving paternity and private life.
