Even when the birth occurs within four months of the marriage, Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 raises a conclusive presumption as to the legitimacy of the child, unless it is proved that the parties to the marriage had no access to each other at any time when the child could have been conceived. The Kerala High Court observed this in Sujatha Krishnan vs Radha Mohandas [2025: KER:97956].
For Section 112 to apply, it is not necessary that the period of access be confined to the post-marital period. The provision becomes inapplicable only upon proof of non-access “at any time when the child could have been conceived.”
Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act states: 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 conceived.
The High Court relied on the Supreme Court judgment in Kamti Devi v. Poshi Ram (AIR 2001 SC 2226), which held that even the birth of a child on the day immediately following a valid marriage falls within the conclusive presumption of legitimacy regarding the paternity of the mother’s husband. However, a birth occurring even one day after the period of 280 days from the date of dissolution of that marriage falls outside this presumption.
