{"id":213720,"date":"2019-04-19T09:30:51","date_gmt":"2019-04-19T04:00:51","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=213720"},"modified":"2019-04-20T15:14:54","modified_gmt":"2019-04-20T09:44:54","slug":"del-hc-mere-assertions-disputing-paternity-of-child-not-sufficient-to-order-dna-test-especially-in-light-of-s-112-of-evidence-act","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/04\/19\/del-hc-mere-assertions-disputing-paternity-of-child-not-sufficient-to-order-dna-test-especially-in-light-of-s-112-of-evidence-act\/","title":{"rendered":"Del HC | Mere assertions disputing paternity of child not sufficient to order DNA test, especially in light of S. 112 of Evidence Act"},"content":{"rendered":"<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Delhi High Court:\u00a0<\/strong>A Bench of G.S. Sistani and Jyoti Singh, JJ. dismissed an appeal filed against the order of the family court whereby the appellant&#8217;s application demanding a DNA test of the child born to her wife was rejected.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">In his pleadings, the husband had submitted that the wife was not living with him at the relevant time and therefore he could not be the father of the child born to her. This fact was denied by the wife in her written statement. Pertinently, the husband did not lead any evidence to substantiate his pleading that the wife was not in the matrimonial home at the relevant time. Consequently, his demand for conducting a DNA test of the child to ascertain the paternity was rejected.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The High Court did not find any infirmity in the family court&#8217;s order. Reference was made to Section 112 of the Evidence Act which says that\u00a0<em>birth during marriage to be a conclusive proof of legitimacy unless it can be shown that the parties had no access to each-other at the time when the child could have been begotten.\u00a0<\/em>But as noted above, the husband did not lead any evidence to substantiate his pleading. The High Court observed: <strong>An application seeking DNA test of the child in our view has very strong repercussion on the child and such an order for conducting a DNA test should be passed in very rare cases where very strong reasons are set out and in extreme circumstances<\/strong>\u00a0<strong>when the matter cannot be resolved by leading evidence in the matter.&#8221;\u00a0<\/strong>In such view of the matter, the appeal was dismissed. [CKP v. MP, <a href=\"http:\/\/scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/6eoM2zO9\"><b>2019 SCC OnLine Del 8077<\/b><\/a>, dated 02-04-2019]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Delhi High Court:\u00a0A Bench of G.S. Sistani and Jyoti Singh, JJ. dismissed an appeal filed against the order of the family court <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[19581,9161,2864,34951],"class_list":["post-213720","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-child","tag-dna-test","tag-family_court","tag-section-112-of-evidence-act"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v26.4 (Yoast SEO v26.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Del HC | Mere assertions disputing paternity of child not sufficient to order DNA test, especially in light of S. 112 of Evidence Act | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/04\/19\/del-hc-mere-assertions-disputing-paternity-of-child-not-sufficient-to-order-dna-test-especially-in-light-of-s-112-of-evidence-act\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Del HC | Mere assertions disputing paternity of child not sufficient to order DNA test, especially in light of S. 112 of Evidence Act\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Delhi High Court:\u00a0A Bench of G.S. Sistani and Jyoti Singh, JJ. dismissed an appeal filed against the order of the family court\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/04\/19\/del-hc-mere-assertions-disputing-paternity-of-child-not-sufficient-to-order-dna-test-especially-in-light-of-s-112-of-evidence-act\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2019-04-19T04:00:51+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-04-20T09:44:54+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Delhi-HC.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1329\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"888\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"1 minute\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/04\/19\/del-hc-mere-assertions-disputing-paternity-of-child-not-sufficient-to-order-dna-test-especially-in-light-of-s-112-of-evidence-act\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/04\/19\/del-hc-mere-assertions-disputing-paternity-of-child-not-sufficient-to-order-dna-test-especially-in-light-of-s-112-of-evidence-act\/\",\"name\":\"Del HC | Mere assertions disputing paternity of child not sufficient to order DNA test, especially in light of S. 112 of Evidence Act | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2019-04-19T04:00:51+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-04-20T09:44:54+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/04\/19\/del-hc-mere-assertions-disputing-paternity-of-child-not-sufficient-to-order-dna-test-especially-in-light-of-s-112-of-evidence-act\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/04\/19\/del-hc-mere-assertions-disputing-paternity-of-child-not-sufficient-to-order-dna-test-especially-in-light-of-s-112-of-evidence-act\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/04\/19\/del-hc-mere-assertions-disputing-paternity-of-child-not-sufficient-to-order-dna-test-especially-in-light-of-s-112-of-evidence-act\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Del HC | Mere assertions disputing paternity of child not sufficient to order DNA test, especially in light of S. 112 of Evidence Act\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\",\"name\":\"Bhumika Indulia\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"caption\":\"Bhumika Indulia\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Del HC | Mere assertions disputing paternity of child not sufficient to order DNA test, especially in light of S. 112 of Evidence Act | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/04\/19\/del-hc-mere-assertions-disputing-paternity-of-child-not-sufficient-to-order-dna-test-especially-in-light-of-s-112-of-evidence-act\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Del HC | Mere assertions disputing paternity of child not sufficient to order DNA test, especially in light of S. 112 of Evidence Act","og_description":"Delhi High Court:\u00a0A Bench of G.S. Sistani and Jyoti Singh, JJ. dismissed an appeal filed against the order of the family court","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/04\/19\/del-hc-mere-assertions-disputing-paternity-of-child-not-sufficient-to-order-dna-test-especially-in-light-of-s-112-of-evidence-act\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2019-04-19T04:00:51+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-04-20T09:44:54+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1329,"height":888,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Delhi-HC.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"1 minute"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/04\/19\/del-hc-mere-assertions-disputing-paternity-of-child-not-sufficient-to-order-dna-test-especially-in-light-of-s-112-of-evidence-act\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/04\/19\/del-hc-mere-assertions-disputing-paternity-of-child-not-sufficient-to-order-dna-test-especially-in-light-of-s-112-of-evidence-act\/","name":"Del HC | Mere assertions disputing paternity of child not sufficient to order DNA test, especially in light of S. 112 of Evidence Act | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2019-04-19T04:00:51+00:00","dateModified":"2019-04-20T09:44:54+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/04\/19\/del-hc-mere-assertions-disputing-paternity-of-child-not-sufficient-to-order-dna-test-especially-in-light-of-s-112-of-evidence-act\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/04\/19\/del-hc-mere-assertions-disputing-paternity-of-child-not-sufficient-to-order-dna-test-especially-in-light-of-s-112-of-evidence-act\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/04\/19\/del-hc-mere-assertions-disputing-paternity-of-child-not-sufficient-to-order-dna-test-especially-in-light-of-s-112-of-evidence-act\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Del HC | Mere assertions disputing paternity of child not sufficient to order DNA test, especially in light of S. 112 of Evidence Act"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a","name":"Bhumika Indulia","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","caption":"Bhumika Indulia"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":294401,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/06\/12\/dna-paternity-test-can-only-be-permitted-in-exceptional-circumstances-rajasthan-hcreiterates\/","url_meta":{"origin":213720,"position":0},"title":"DNA Paternity test cannot be allowed in routine manner, can only be permitted in exceptional circumstances; Rajasthan High Court reiterates","author":"Editor","date":"June 12, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Rajasthan High Court observed that the DNA Paternity Test requires to be conducted only in exceptional cases, and therefore, the child cannot be used as a weapon to get divorce on ground of adultery, on the strength of outcome of a DNA Paternity Test.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Rajasthan High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-518.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-518.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-518.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-518.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":284694,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/21\/paternity-dna-test-adultery-chil-not-pawn-divorce-right-to-privacy-benefit-of-child-supreme-court-section-112-114-evidence-act-adverse-inference-against-wife-legal-updates-knowledge-research-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":213720,"position":1},"title":"\u201cChild cannot be used as a pawn to prove allegation of adultery against wife\u201d; SC lays down scope of using DNA profiling in divorce cases","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"February 21, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The Supreme Court held that merely because either of the parties have disputed a factum of paternity, it does not mean that the Court should direct DNA test or such other test to resolve the controversy. Only in exceptional and deserving cases, where such a test becomes indispensable to resolve\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"\u201cChild cannot be used as a pawn to prove allegation of adultery against wife\u201d; SC lays down scope of using DNA profiling in divorce cases","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-474.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-474.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-474.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-474.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":216113,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/06\/26\/raj-hc-husband-seeking-dna-test-of-child-born-to-his-wife-must-establish-non-excess-to-his-wife-during-the-period-of-9-months-beyond-reasonable-doubt\/","url_meta":{"origin":213720,"position":2},"title":"Raj HC | Husband seeking DNA test of child born to his wife must establish no access to his wife during the period of 9 months, beyond reasonable doubt","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"June 26, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Rajasthan High Court: Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, J. dismissed a petition filed by a man who assailed the lower court\u2019s order rejecting an application for conducting a DNA test of his wife\u2019s son, holding that the petition was devoid of merits. Petitioner herein had filed an application before the learned Civil\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":352985,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/10\/bombay-hc-refuses-dna-profiling-test-of-minor-to-establish-paternity-court-custodian-of-child-rights\/","url_meta":{"origin":213720,"position":3},"title":"\u201cCourts must act as custodian of child\u2019s rights\u201d; Bombay High Court refuses DNA Profiling Test to establish paternity","author":"Editor","date":"July 10, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThe presumption of conclusive proof of legitimacy of child, casts greater burden on the man to show that parties to the marriage had no access to each other at any time when the child could have been begotten. The presumption of legitimacy, therefore, must be challenged with specific plea of\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"dna profiling test of minor","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/dna-profiling-test-of-minor.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/dna-profiling-test-of-minor.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/dna-profiling-test-of-minor.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/dna-profiling-test-of-minor.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":6276,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2014\/10\/17\/dna-test-can-be-conducted-to-prove-or-disprove-allegations-of-adultery\/","url_meta":{"origin":213720,"position":4},"title":"DNA test can be conducted to prove or disprove allegations of adultery","author":"Sucheta","date":"October 17, 2014","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: Deciding the issue of proving infidelity of a spouse, the bench of J.S. Khehar and R.K. Agrawal, JJ held that DNA test can be conducted to determine the veracity of the allegations of adultery. However, considering the fact that the said test will automatically determine the issue of\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Supreme Court&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Supreme Court","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/supremecourt\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":281419,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/01\/11\/bombay-high-court-upholds-maintenance-rejecting-grounds-of-illegitimacy-by-dna-test-mere-denial-of-wife-for-dnatest-not-sufficient-ground-to-draw-adverse-inference-legalnews-legalresearch-legalawarene\/","url_meta":{"origin":213720,"position":5},"title":"Bombay High Court | Denial by wife to go through DNA test in order to prove legitimacy of child not a sufficient ground to draw adverse inference against the wife","author":"Editor","date":"January 11, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Bombay High Court: In a petition filed by the husband challenging on the ground of legitimacy of the child born from wedlock, the order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Beed dated 30-11-2016 thereby dismissing the revision application challenging the judgment and order passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class,\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/11\/Bombay-High-Court-1.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/213720","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8808"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=213720"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/213720\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=213720"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=213720"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=213720"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}