Bigamy — DNA Test Not Warranted · 17 August 2026
M v. Government of Tamil Nadu: DNA Paternity Test Not Warranted to Prove a Charge of Bigamy
High Court of Judicature at Madras (Madurai Bench) · 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 390; Crl RC (MD) No. 17 of 2026
Download the full judgment (PDF)
Enter your name and WhatsApp number to get the download link. We'll also let you know on WhatsApp if we can help with this case — filing, tracking, or anything else — no obligation either way.
We use this only to send the link and to follow up about this case. See our privacy policy.
A man married in January 2011, and a son was born to the couple in 2012. The wife later learnt, she alleged, that he had concealed a subsisting earlier marriage before marrying her, and filed a criminal complaint; an FIR followed under Section 495 IPC (bigamy where the earlier marriage is concealed from the person being married) along with related sections. During the trial, while being cross-examined, the husband suggested he was not the child's biological father and that the complainant herself had an earlier marriage. On this basis, the prosecution applied for a DNA test of the husband and the child, which the trial court allowed — prompting the husband's challenge before the High Court.
The Madras High Court set aside the order for DNA testing. It held that proving the offence of bigamy under Section 495 IPC requires showing that a second marriage was contracted while concealing a subsisting first one — the child's biological parentage has no bearing on that question. Citing Supreme Court authority that a DNA test may be ordered only where the result is directly in issue and there is a genuine, pressing need for it, the Court held neither condition was met here, since paternity was never actually in dispute in the bigamy charge, and set aside the trial court's direction.
General information, not legal advice. This is a plain-language summary for awareness only. Every case turns on its own facts, and this judgment does not decide how a court will rule in your matter. For advice on your own case, speak to an independent advocate — MyCaseFile is not a law firm and does not interpret judgments for anyone's case.