The 21st century has, over the past decade, shaped itself to become the age of technology. Technology has touched nearly every area of life, from home appliances and occupational necessities to health and bodily functions. Extensive research and development have been done in biological technology or biotechnology. Medical science has advanced leaps and bounds through technology, and what once used to be fantasy has been realised in physical medium.
One such highly celebrated achievement in the field of medical technology is the successful use of Assistive Reproductive Techniques (ARTs). Assistive Reproductive Technologies (ART), which includes methods such as in vitro fertilisation (IVF), surrogacy, and sperm or egg donation, have transformed the possibilities of parenthood, giving hope to many couples and individuals facing infertility. However, the advent of ART calls into question long-held beliefs about conception, parentage, and legitimacy. With techniques like IVF and surrogacy, the biological connection between the child and the parents can be complicated, involving donors and surrogates. This complication necessitates a rethinking of existing legal presumptions and frameworks to adequately address the liability of each party, their right with respect to their claim on the parentage of the child and other responsibilities.
The revamping of the Indian Evidence Act and its evolution into the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam had brought the hope that questions of legitimacy and its correlation with DNA testing which constantly circle around the ARTs would be put to rest. What happens to the child in such a dispute? Who is the actual parent? Is DNA evidence even reliable? These are just some of the questions which are still awaiting an answer even after the new and improved provisions of evidence in the BSA have been implemented. This paper tries to explore some of these uncertainties regarding legitimacy of a child and the validity of such presumption born of ARTs and propose a possible answer to them.