Birth during marriage, conclusive proof of legitimacy
Section 116 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 deals with birth during marriage, conclusive proof of legitimacy. The fact that any person was born during the continuance of a valid marriage between his mother and any man, or within two hundred and eighty days after its dissolution, the mother remaining unmarried, shall be conclusive proof that he is the legitimate child of that man, unless it can be shown that The Act came into force on 01 Jul 2024.
The fact that any person was born during the continuance of a valid marriage between his mother and any man, or within two hundred and eighty days after its dissolution, the mother remaining unmarried, shall be conclusive proof that he is the legitimate child of that man, unless it can be shown that the parties to the marriage had no access to each other at any time when he could have been begotten.
Section 116, The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (Act 47 of 2023).
Replaces a provision of the Indian Evidence Act
IEA 112 Birth during marriage, conclusive proof of legitimacy Text carried over almost unchanged 97%
Measured by comparing the text of the two provisions, not taken from an official correspondence table — there is no machine-readable one. See both texts side by side before relying on it.
Both regimes are live. The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force. We never redirect one to the other.
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
Nandlal Wasudeo Badwaik v. Lata Nandlal Badwaik
Decided under Indian Evidence Act 112, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Judgment of Main Case order-23.pdf labelled Judgment 2014-01-06. DATE-CHECK flagged 1993/2010/2011 fact dates (false positive); markdown is the 6 Jan 2014 Prasad/Khehar reportable (Crl A 24/2014). Scientifically accurate DNA proof yields to / rebuts s.112's conclusive legitimacy when they conflict; 'truth must triumph.' Map iea 112 and bsa 116.
On this section: Successor of IEA 112 (mapping.csv near-identical, score 0.9719). The DNA-versus-presumption teaching carries to BSA 116.
-
Aparna Ajinkya Firodia vs Ajinkya Arun Firodia
Decided under Indian Evidence Act 112, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
A matrimonial court cannot routinely order a DNA test of a child to prove a husband's allegations of adultery against the wife when there is no dispute regarding access during the period of conception. Furthermore, if a mother declines to subject her minor child to a DNA test in order to protect the child's identity, welfare, and privacy, no adverse inference of adultery can be drawn against her under Section 114 Illustration (h) of the Indian Evidence Act.
On this section: Conclusive proof of legitimacy of a child born during marriage unless non-access is shown.
-
Supriyo @ Supriya Chakraborty vs Union Of India
Decided under Indian Evidence Act 112, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The Supreme Court held that while there is no fundamental right to marry under the Indian Constitution, LGBTQ+ persons have a constitutional right to enter into abiding cohabitational relationships grounded in Articles 14, 15, 19, 21, and 25. The Special Marriage Act 1954 cannot be read down to permit same-sex marriages due to semantic impossibilities and interconnected gendered provisions. The Court recognized that existing laws create indirect discriminatory impact on queer couples by denying them access to spousal benefits in employment, succession, adoption, and taxation. The Court declined to issue directions for marriage equality, finding such matters require comprehensive parliamentary action. Instead, the Court directed the Union Government to constitute a high-powered committee to examine the discriminatory impact of existing laws and regulations on same-sex couples and recommend appropriate remedies. Transgender persons in heterosexual relationships can marry under existing laws through harmonious interpretation with the Transgender Persons Act.
On this section: Presumes legitimacy of child born during marriage; discussed as assuming procreation purpose of marriage
-
Dipanwita Roy vs Ronobroto Roy
Decided under Indian Evidence Act 112, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
In matrimonial disputes where specific allegations of infidelity and adultery are levelled under Section 13(1)(ii) of the Hindu Marriage Act, a court may direct DNA testing to establish or refute such allegations as a distinct legal issue from the question of legitimacy of a child born during the marriage. DNA testing is permissible when it is eminently needed and the court, after balancing the interests of all parties (including the child's welfare and the right to privacy), is satisfied that such testing is necessary for a just decision. The direction for DNA testing does not necessarily trigger the full rigours of Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act's conclusive presumption, as the primary issue is infidelity, not legitimacy. However, the court must preserve the liberty of parties to comply or disregard the DNA test direction, with adverse inferences drawn under Section 114 of the Evidence Act in case of non-compliance, thereby protecting the child's presumption of legitimacy under Section 112 to the maximum extent possible.
On this section: Conclusive proof of legitimacy based on birth during valid marriage and opportunity of access; examined as the primary statutory protection against bastardization of children.
-
Kambappa S/o Gududappa vs Rangaswamy
Decided under Indian Evidence Act 112, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
In a suit for partition, all sharers are necessary parties. An appeal that fails to join all necessary parties who were parties to the original suit is liable to be dismissed to avoid conflicting decrees.
On this section: Presumption of legitimacy of children born during a valid marriage.
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Questions about Section 116
What have the courts held on Section 116 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam?
Nandlal Wasudeo Badwaik v. Lata Nandlal Badwaik (06 Jan 2014) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below, though it was decided under IEA 112, which this section replaced -- the court never mentioned this Act: Successor of IEA 112 (mapping.csv near-identical, score 0.9719). The DNA-versus-presumption teaching carries to BSA 116. Another 4 judgments on this section are set out below, 4 of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2007 to 2023.
How do I find court cases under Section 116 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: BSA 116, section 116 BSA, section 116 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam. People searching for it also type 116 bsa act and 116 bsa 200a. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 5 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Nandlal Wasudeo Badwaik v. Lata Nandlal Badwaik (06 Jan 2014).
What should I read with Section 116 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, and has it changed?
It carries forward IEA 112 (Birth during marriage, conclusive proof of legitimacy), so the judgments decided under that provision are the case law on this one.
When did Section 116 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam come into force?
Section 116 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, commonly called presumption of legitimacy, and cited as BSA 116, came into force on 01 Jul 2024, having been enacted on 25 Dec 2023. It is in force as at the date shown on this page.
Other sections of this Act
- 26. Cases in which statement of relevant fact by person who is dead or cannot be found, etc., is relevant1128 words
- 12. Facts showing existence of state of mind, or of body or bodily feeling1076 words
- 95. Exclusion of evidence of oral agreement815 words
- 2. Definitions794 words
- 6. Motive, preparation and previous or subsequent conduct773 words
- 63. Admissibility of electronic records764 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Text as in force on 15 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.