This petition is directed against the orders dated 21.06.2010 and 07.06.2010 passed by Respondents No, 1 and 2 respectively, whereby the application for conducting DNA test of Petitioner No, 1 filed by Respondent No, 3 was allowed by the learned trial Court/Respondent No, 2 against which the revision petition, filed by the petitioners was also dismissed by Respondent No, 1.
2. The brief facts of the case are that a suit for partition, possession and permanent injunction filed by Respondent No, 3 against the six persons including the present petitioners is pending adjudication and no written statement still has been filed by the present petitioners. Meanwhile, an application for conducting the DNA test of Petitioner No, 1 Mst. Parveen Akhtar has been moved as the claim of the plaintiff/Respondent No, 3 in the suit is that Mst. Parveen Akhtar/Petitioner No, 1 is not daughter of Muhammad Din deceased. The application was resisted by the present petitioners by filing their reply on the ground that the application is based on mala fide intention just to harass, humiliate black mail and bring into disrepute her modesty and also controverted the facts of the case. However, the learned trial Court accepted the application. This order was challenged before Respondent No, 1, the Revisional Court was also dismissed on 21.06.2010.
2. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the matter is still at the stage of filing of the written statement. Unless and until the controversy of the parties is not condensed into issues and parties are not allowed to lead the oral and documentary evidence, the application for creating the evidence against the petitioners is unwarranted and uncalled for.
3. On the other hand, when this situation has been confronted to the learned counsel for the respondents that this is an untimely demand for conducting of DNA test, which is merely an expert opinion and otherwise can only be obtained to further strengthen the evidence on any fact, the learned counsel remained wordless.
4. In this view of the matter, the orders passed by the both the learned Courts, below seem to have been passed in a hasty manner and without any justifiable reason are set aside. However, if the learned trial Court after framing the issues and recording the evidence of the parties at any stage, deems it appropriate may invite the report from the expert but this, is not the suitable stage for exercise of this power.
5. For what has been discussed above, this petition is allowed.