The Supreme Court has initiated contempt proceedings against Dr Nikhil Tandon, Acting Director of the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), New Delhi, after expressing serious displeasure over the institution’s failure to comply with its earlier direction requiring the head of AIIMS to personally file an affidavit in a pending matter relating to a DNA test report.
The Bench of Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Justice R Mahadevan passed the order while hearing a case arising out of a matrimonial dispute in which the Court had directed a DNA test to determine the paternity of a child born to the parties.
The controversy arose after the Court found that an affidavit had been filed by Nishant Kumar, stated to be a Deputy Secretary at AIIMS, instead of the Director of the institution. The Court had, by an order dated April 16, specifically directed the Director of AIIMS to furnish an explanation. However, the affidavit was filed by an authorised officer on behalf of the institution rather than by its head.
Taking strong exception to the development, the Bench observed that it had expressly sought an explanation from the Director and that it was not open to any official to delegate that responsibility to another person. The Court described this aspect of the affidavit as highly objectionable and emphasised that compliance with judicial directions could not be left to the discretion of administrative authorities.
During the hearing, counsel appearing for AIIMS submitted that there was presently no regular Director at AIIMS, New Delhi, as the previous Director had demitted office approximately two to three weeks earlier. It was further submitted that the present incumbent was only holding charge as Acting Director.
The Supreme Court, however, rejected the explanation and stated that it was not only surprised but shocked by the response. The Bench observed that any person occupying a public office, whether in a substantive or acting capacity, is obligated to discharge the duties and responsibilities attached to that office. The Court held that the nature of the appointment could not be used as a ground to avoid compliance with judicial orders.
The Bench further observed that it was not inclined to extend any benefit of doubt to the present head of the institution and prima facie found that contempt of court had been committed. Consequently, Dr Nikhil Tandon, Acting Director of AIIMS, New Delhi, was impleaded as a party respondent in the proceedings and a contempt notice was issued to him.
The Court directed Dr Tandon to remain personally present before it on July 7, 2026, at noon and to file his explanation in response to the contempt notice.
On the merits of the dispute, the Supreme Court took note of the DNA analysis report submitted by the Department of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology at AIIMS. The report concluded that the DNA profile of the child matched the DNA profiles of the parties and confirmed that the individual concerned was the biological father of the child.
In light of the findings recorded in the DNA report, the Court held that the miscellaneous applications pending before it no longer required adjudication and disposed of them accordingly. However, the matter will remain pending solely for the purpose of considering the Acting Director’s explanation and his appearance in connection with the contempt proceedings.
The Bench directed that copies of the DNA report be supplied to all concerned parties. It further ordered that the original report be handed over to the petitioner’s counsel for onward transmission to the petitioner.
The Court also directed the petitioner’s counsel to place the DNA report before the concerned High Court, which shall thereafter proceed with the underlying matrimonial dispute in accordance with law.
The post Supreme Court issues contempt notice to AIIMS Acting Director over non-compliance with affidavit direction in DNA test case appeared first on India Legal.