Chanchal Devi @ Chanchal Kumari v. Arvind Kumar Patel

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION No.26 of 2022 ====================================================== Chanchal Devi @ Chanchal Kumari Wife of Arvind Kumar Patel, resident of Village-Bhagwatipur, Post-Barka Amaon, Police Station-Chainpur, DistrictKaimur, presently daughter of Rajbansh Singh, resident of Village-Ajhashpur, Police Station-Bhabua, District-Kaimur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

Arvind Kumar Patel son of Durga Prasad Singh, resident of VillageBhagwatipur, Post-Barka Amaon, Police Station-Chainpur, District-Kaimur. 2.

Sanjay Singh, son of Sidhnath Singh, resident of Village Nasej, Police Station-Kudra, District-Kaimur.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Jitendra Prasad Singh For the Respondent/s :

Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 23-06-2022 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner.

The petitioner is aggrieved by the order, dated 05.10.2021, passed, by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Kaimur, at Bhabhua, in Matrimonial Case No. 75 of 2007, whereby the learned Court below has directed for D.N.A. test of the child with the respondent nos. 1 and 2.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent no. 1 is the husband of the petitioner and respondent no. 2 is the stranger and in the matrimonial case filed by the respondent no. 1 for divorce, he has alleged that the petitioner is having illicit relationship with respondent no. 2. He submits that the petitioner is ready for D.N.A. test with respondent no. 2, but

Patna High Court C.Misc. No.26 of 2022(2) dt.23-06-2022 2/2 by the impugned order, the learned Court below has directed for D.N.A. test of respondent nos. 1 and 2.

Having considered the submissions made by learned Counsel for the petitioner and the fact that the petitioner is ready for D.N.A. test of the child to be compared with the D.N.A. of respondent no. 2, I do not find any infirmity in the impugned order directing for D.N.A. test of the husband (respondent no. 1) also. Accordingly, I do not find any material irregularity or jurisdictional error in the impugned order.

This application is, accordingly, dismissed.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J.) Prabhakar Anand/- U √