Private labs like Hiranandani do not have the resources and legal sanctions that government forensic labs have to actually perform the tests. They collect saliva samples of both the parents and the child on cotton swabs, which are then dried and sent in an air-tight pouch to Chicago in the US of A. Results are normally available after an agonising wait of two to three weeks. But they have been getting brisk inquires.

While such tests bring relief or pain to the family, they do not have a legal standing yet. In 1993, when DNA testing was not prevalent and simple blood grouping tests instead were the norm to ascertain paternity, a landmark judgment was passed by the Supreme Court.

The child maintenance case involved one Goutam Kundu who disputed that he was the father. His wife had gone home to give her higher secondary exams, during which period she claimed she was pregnant. Kundu questioned the paternity of the child and asked her to abort. She refused.

The couple separated but the wife demanded child maintenance from her estranged husband.

To counter this claim, Kundu asked for a blood grouping test to support his claim that his wife had not delivered his child. But Justices A M Ahmadi and S Mohan ruled that since the purpose of his application was to avoid paying maintenance, the request cannot be accepted.

They also quoted a section of the Evidence Act of 1872 that naively states that “if a person was born during the continuance of a valid marriage between his mother and any other man or within 280 days after its dissolution and the mother remains unmarried, it shall be taken as a conclusive proof that he is the legitimate son of that man, unless it can be shown that the parties to the marriage had no access to each other at any time when the child could have been begotten.”

Ten years later, in 2003, by which time DNA testing had permeated the society, the Supreme Court took a different view in the Sharda Vs Dharmpal divorce case.

It said that a Family Court had the power to order a person to undergo medical test, the nature of which was not specified, but an interpretation includes DNA paternity test.

The fact that the results of DNA testing can be a weapon in court and would inevitably drag doctors to the witness box, is a reason why some medical practitioners avoid being associated with such tests, though it’s good business. “We are doctors. We cannot run every other day from clinic to court,” says Dr Hema Purandare of the Centre for Genetic Health. Interestingly, she points out, many requests for tests come from the lower middle to poor classes, who somehow manage to gather money for the tests.

A bulk of DNA paternity tests is being handled by the Centre for DNA Fingerprinting and Diagnostics (CDFD) in Hyderabad, an autonomous organisation funded by the department of biotechnology, ministry of science and technology. In the past three years, the institute has handled over 1,000 paternity cases.

CDFD handles requests from government bodies and legal authorities across India. Dr J Gaurishankar, director-incharge, informs that CDFD has handled nearly 1,000 paternity-related cases in the past three years.