The Supreme Court of India recently reaffirmed a controversial legal principle: a child born during a valid marriage is presumed to be the husband’s, regardless of biological truth. This presumption, under Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act, can only be overturned if the husband proves he had no access to his wife during conception.

At first glance, this law seems designed to protect children from instability. But what about the husband? What about the betrayal, deception, and lifelong fraud inflicted upon him when his wife bears another man’s child?

This law is not just unfair it is immoral, unjust, and a form of legalized cruelty.

Here lies the tension between legal paternity and biological truth.

Legal Paternity vs. Biological Truth

Imagine this:

• A man marries a woman, trusting her completely.
• She becomes pregnant, he believes the child is his.
• Years later, he discovers the child is not biologically his.
• Despite the betrayal, the court tells him: “You must keep paying. You must remain the legal father.”

How is this justice?

The law essentially says: “Even if your wife cheated, even if she lied, even if you were tricked into raising another man’s child, you must accept it.”

In India, challenging this presumption is extremely hard. The husband must prove “non-access” during the time of conception essentially showing he could not have had sexual relations with his wife at that time. But what if the couple was still living together, yet the wife conceived with another man? Legally, the husband’s case becomes almost impossible.

This leads to absurd outcomes:

• A man can be 100% proven by DNA not to be the father.
• Yet, the law can still hold him financially and socially responsible.
• He may be denied the right to refuse paternity, even when betrayed.

The Law Encourages Infidelity and Deception

If a woman is a rape victim, or was coerced or abused, the child’s situation is tragic and the husband’s compassion becomes part of healing. Most humane men would not walk away from supporting a partner in such pain.
This is not the scenario we are challenging here.

The real ethical problem arises when:

• The wife willingly engages in an affair.
• Conceives a child outside the marriage.
• Hides or lies about the child’s biological origin.
• Expects the husband to shoulder full legal and financial responsibility.

In this case, the law instead of protecting the innocent actually shields the wrongdoer.
It removes consequences for infidelity and imposes life-altering duties on the betrayed partner.

This is not equality. This is not justice.

Moral Cruelty to the Husband

In matrimonial law, “cruelty” doesn’t just mean physical harm. It includes mental and emotional cruelty actions that break trust, dignity, and self-worth.

Forcing a man to raise another man’s child without his informed consent is one of the deepest breaches of trust possible in a marriage.

It affects the husband in several ways:

1. Emotional devastation – Discovering that a child you love is not biologically yours is a trauma that can cause depression, anxiety, and lifelong trust issues.
2. Financial strain – The man is legally bound to pay for the child’s upbringing, education, healthcare, and sometimes inheritance obligations that can last 20+ years.
3. Social stigma – In conservative communities, the man may face whispers, pity, or ridicule, even when he is the victim.
4. Loss of autonomy – He is denied the basic human right to choose whether to be a father to that child.

In the landmark case Nandlal Wasudeo Badwaik vs. Lata Nandlal Badwaik (2014), the Supreme Court acknowledged that when scientific evidence (like DNA tests) contradicts legal presumption, truth should prevail. Yet, in practice, Section 112 still ties the hands of many men unless they can prove “non-access.”

The Law Ignores Consent and Violates Human Rights

Parenthood should be voluntary.

• If a man adopts a child, he does so knowingly.
• If a man donates sperm, he does so by choice.

But under this law, a man is forced into fatherhood without his consent.

This is reproductive coercion a violation of basic human rights.

The Law Punishes the Victim (the Husband) While Protecting the Wrongdoer (the Wife)

If a woman lies about paternity:

• She faces no punishment.
• She keeps financial support.
• She gets away with fraud.

But the husband?

• He loses his right to biological fatherhood (if he later wants his own child).
• He pays for a child that isn’t his.
• He suffers emotional trauma for years.

Where is the justice?

“But What If the Woman Was Raped?”

Some argue that this law protects women in extreme cases, like rape.

Fine.

If a woman is a victim of assault, exceptions should apply. But what about consensual affairs?

Why should a cheating wife get the same legal protection as a rape survivor?

The law must differentiate between:

• A victim (rape survivor) → Protect her and the child.
• A deceiver (woman who had an affair) → Hold her accountable.

Right now, the law treats both cases the same and that is wrong.

International Perspectives

Other countries have moved towards balancing these rights.

• United States: Several states allow “disestablishment of paternity” when DNA evidence proves non-paternity, though timelines for filing vary.
• UK: Men can challenge paternity and, if proven, are not held responsible for child support except where the man knowingly accepted the child as his own.
• France: If paternity is contested and disproven, legal responsibility can shift to the biological father.

India can learn from these models:

• Protect the child’s dignity.
• Hold the actual biological parent accountable.
• Avoid punishing the innocent husband.

Possible Reforms in Indian Law

A fairer system could include:

1. DNA testing upon dispute – If paternity is questioned within a reasonable period after birth, courts should order a DNA test without requiring proof of non-access first.
2. Shift of responsibility – Once biological paternity is established; financial and legal duties should transfer to the biological father.
3. Protection for the child – The law can set up interim financial support systems so that the child is not left without care during legal transitions.
4. Penalties for deliberate deception – If a spouse knowingly misleads the other about paternity, it should be recognized as legal and moral cruelty, with appropriate legal consequences.
5. Case-by-case discretion – Allow judges to consider emotional, moral, and circumstantial factors rather than applying a rigid presumption.

Why Truth Matters in Marriage and Law

Marriage is built on trust. Parenthood is built on truth and consent.
When the law forces a man to accept false paternity, it erodes both.

The legal fiction of paternity under Section 112 was created for a time when DNA tests didn’t exist. Back then, the only way to avoid stigma was to assume the husband was the father unless proven otherwise.
But today, with scientific accuracy available, there’s no need to preserve a lie at the cost of justice.

Truth does not destroy family’s betrayal does.
Protecting the truth alongside compassion ensures that laws don’t become tools for injustice.

This Law is Unjust and Must Change

Forcing a man to raise another man’s child against his will is slavery.

It is financial exploitation.

It is emotional abuse.

And it is time for the law to change.

A man should not be punished for his wife’s lies.

A child’s welfare matters but not at the cost of an innocent man’s life.

Justice must be fair for everyone.

Even for husbands.

“I am missing those days when LOVE was pure and cruel-free”