Correct option is C
The correct answer is (c) Both (A) and (B) are true.
Explanation: According to Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act, there is a presumption that a child born during the continuance of a valid marriage between his mother and any man, or within 280 days after its dissolution, the mother remaining unmarried, shall be conclusive proof that he is the legitimate child of that man. This Section establishes the legitimacy of children born within a lawful wedlock.
Narendra Nath Pahari v/s Ram Govind Pahari is indeed a leading case concerning the legitimacy of a child born during the continuance of a valid marriage. The Supreme Court in this case reaffirmed the presumption under Section 112, stating that strong and conclusive proof is required to rebut this presumption.
Therefore, the correct option is (c) Both (A) and (B) are true.
Information Booster:
· Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act provides a strong presumption of legitimacy, which can only be rebutted by strong evidence.
· The rationale behind Section 112 is to ensure the stability of marital relationships and social order.
· The presumption can be challenged only by proving that the husband had no access to the wife at the time the child could have been conceived.
· Narendra Nath Pahari v/s Ram Govind Pahari is a landmark judgment that highlights the application of Section 112.
· The Court in this case emphasized that mere suspicion or doubt is insufficient to disprove the legitimacy of a child.
· This presumption plays a critical role in inheritance and succession cases, affecting the legal status of children.
