As per case facts, the petitioner-wife challenged a Family Court order allowing the respondent-husband's application for a DNA test of their girl child. The husband, an Indian Army soldier, filed ... for divorce on grounds of adultery, claiming non-access around the time of conception and suspicious circumstances regarding the wife's reported pregnancy and the child's birth. The wife, a police constable, argued against the DNA test, citing the child's right to privacy and the presumption of legitimacy under the Indian Evidence Act, supported by Supreme Court judgments. The husband's pleadings detailed a call from his wife in October 2015, followed by a quick intimation of pregnancy within four days of his arrival, and the child's birth within eight months, which he later learned was biologically improbable. The question arose whether a DNA test could be ordered to prove adultery, given the presumption of legitimacy and the child's right to privacy, when non-access is pleaded and the legitimacy issue is incidental to the divorce petition. Finally, the High Court upheld the Family Court's order for a DNA test, asserting that in cases of adultery where sufficient pleadings of non-access are present, and the legitimacy of the child is an incidental issue, a DNA test can be directed. It distinguished previous Supreme Court judgments, noting that while privacy and legitimacy are important, the "eminent need" to balance interests and establish infidelity justifies such a test. The Court also indicated that if the petitioner refuses the DNA test, a presumption could be drawn against her under Section 114(h) of the Indian Evidence Act or corresponding provisions of BSA 2023.