Can’t agree to DNA test, Dhanush tells HC

‘I have nothing to hide, but my integrity, right to privacy should not be tested’

Indian actor Dhanush poses for photographers at a photocall for the film 'Shamitabh' in central London on January 27, 2015. AFP PHOTO / JUSTIN TALLIS

Actor Dhanush on Tuesday told the Madras High Court Bench here that he was opposing the plea for a DNA test made by a couple who had filed a maintenance case before a lower court claiming to be his biological parents, not because he had something to hide, but because his integrity and right to privacy should not be tested at the instance of people who file frivolous cases.

The submission was made before Justice P.N. Prakash, who reserved his verdict without mentioning the date on which the judgment would be pronounced. Earlier, the actor had filed a petition seeking to quash the case filed by R. Kathiresan (65) and K. Meenakshi (53) before a Judicial Magistrate at Melur near here in November, seeking maintenance amount of ₹65,000 a month.

Representing the actor, senior counsel Ramakrishnan Veeraraghavan told the judge that the Supreme Court had, in more than one case, held that DNA test could not be ordered as a matter of course.

At this point, Mr. Justice Prakash interrupted to state: “I will not exercise my discretion on the issue of DNA test because it is beyond my jurisdiction. The jurisdiction of this court under Section 482 (the provision under which the quash petition had been filed) of the Code of Criminal Procedure might look large but it has its own limitations. At the same time, I should also answer the couple’s plea to give them an opportunity to put the actor in the witness box and try him before the lower court.”

Discrepancy in dates

The senior counsel pointed out that the couple had produced an employment registration certificate of their son dated June 17, 2002. “But here I have an unimpeachable evidence of the Censor Board having issued a certificate on March 15, 2002 for Dhanush’s maiden movie

Thulluvatho Ilamai . It proves that he had acted in the movie much before that,” Mr. Veeraraghavan said.

Challenging the contention, the couple’s counsel S. Titus claimed that the movie got released only in 2003. To this, the senior counsel replied that a lawyer, who drafted the memorandum, had mentioned the year of release as 2003 by mistake.

Mr. Justice Prakash said: “You cannot blow hot and cold. I can go into an unimpeachable document, provided there is consistency in your submissions.”