Disputed Paternity and Kinship: Statistical and Case Analysis (UGC-NET Unit III)
Published:
Questions
30
Duration
30 min
Faculty-reviewed
0
Updated
17 May 2026
About this mock
UGC-NET Forensic Science Unit III advanced drill on disputed paternity and kinship analysis. Hard-band scenario questions on Combined Paternity Index (CPI) across 15+ autosomal STR loci with Indian population allele frequencies, Probability of Paternity calculations under non-uniform priors, mutation rate handling (one-step paternal vs maternal mutations, stepwise mutation model), close-relative paternity (alleged father is brother of true father, half-sibling vs full-sibling distinction), reverse paternity from grandparents, Avuncular Index, mitochondrial maternal-lineage disputes, ISFG Paternity Testing Commission recommendations, Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act 1872 (Section 116 BSA 2023) on legitimacy presumption during wedlock, and the Goutam Kundu (1993), Nandlal Wasudeo Badwaik (2014), and Dipanwita Roy (2015) line of Supreme Court authority on court-ordered DNA testing. Calibrated for candidates targeting Paper II top-decile scores.
Sources & references
Questions in this mock are written and verified against the following sources. Citations are recorded per question and shown in the explanation after submission.
- cited in 8 questions
Butler J M, Advanced Topics in Forensic DNA Typing: Interpretation, Academic Press, 2015
Chapter 14, Paternity Testing and Kinship Analysis: combination of single-locus PIs across loci under linkage equilibrium
Open source - cited in 4 questions
ISFG Paternity Testing Commission, Recommendations on biostatistics in paternity testing, FSI Genetics 1(3), 2007
Gjertson D W et al., ISFG PTC on motherless paternity testing; AABB Annual Report Summary, Relationship Testing Standards
Open source - cited in 2 questions
Brenner C H, Symbolic kinship program, Genetics 145(2): 535 to 542 (1997)
Avuncular Index construction in Butler 2015 Chapter 14 and in Egeland T, Familias documentation; IBD coefficients for uncle-nephew pairs
Open source - cited in 1 question
Essen-Moller E, Die Beweiskraft der Aehnlichkeit im Vaterschaftsnachweis, Mitteilungen der Anthropologischen Gesellschaft Wien, 1938
Standard Bayesian derivation of W = CPI / (CPI + 1) under prior 0.5; reproduced in Butler 2015 Chapter 14 and ISFG PTC 2007
Open source - cited in 1 question
ISFG Paternity Testing Commission, Recommendations on biostatistics in paternity testing, Forensic Science International Genetics, 2007
Gjertson D W et al., ISFG: Recommendations on biostatistics in paternity testing, FSI Genetics 1(3), 2007, paras on heterozygous AF and PI = 0.5 / p
Open source - cited in 1 question
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012, Sections 27 and 28; Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023, Sections 64 and 65
Butler 2015 Chapter 14 on POC-derived foetal DNA in paternity workflows; POCSO Special Court guidelines
Open source - cited in 1 question
AABB, Annual Report Summary for Testing in 2008 (and subsequent annual editions), Relationship Testing Standards Committee
ISFG Paternity Testing Commission 2007 on reporting thresholds; Butler 2015 Chapter 14 on practically-proved paternity language
Open source - cited in 1 question
Thompson E A, Likelihood inference of paternity, American Journal of Human Genetics 39(2): 285 to 290 (1986)
Brenner C H, Symbolic kinship program, Genetics 145(2): 535 to 542 (1997); Egeland T et al., Familias documentation
Open source - cited in 1 question
Goutam Kundu v. State of West Bengal, (1993) 3 SCC 418
Supreme Court of India, Goutam Kundu paras 26 to 28; the five-proposition framework for court-ordered DNA in paternity disputes
Open source - cited in 1 question
Balding D J and Nichols R A, DNA profile match probability calculation, Forensic Science International 64: 125 to 140 (1994)
Indian-population allele frequency datasets (Trivedi et al., AIIMS-FDC) and the Fst (theta) correction approach under NRC II 1996
Open source - cited in 1 question
Indian Evidence Act 1872, Section 112; Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023, Section 116
Section 112 IEA as applied in Goutam Kundu v. State of West Bengal (1993) 3 SCC 418 and Nandlal Wasudeo Badwaik v. Lata Nandlal Badwaik (2014) 2 SCC 576
Open source - cited in 1 question
Dipanwita Roy v. Ronobroto Roy, (2015) 1 SCC 365
Supreme Court of India, Dipanwita Roy paras 9 to 18 on court-ordered DNA in divorce, the Section 114 IEA adverse-inference framework
Open source - cited in 1 question
Sharda v. Dharmpal, (2003) 4 SCC 493; Code of Civil Procedure 1908, Section 75 and Order 26 Rule 10A; Section 151 CPC
Supreme Court of India, Sharda paras 76 to 81 on the jurisdictional basis for DNA sampling in civil matrimonial proceedings
Open source - cited in 1 question
Sharda v. Dharmpal, (2003) 4 SCC 493; Indian Penal Code 1860 Section 297; Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023 Section 301
Sharda proportionality framework on scientific testing in civil proceedings; Code of Criminal Procedure Section 176; Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 196 on lawful exhumation
Open source - cited in 1 question
Essen-Moller E, Mitteilungen der Anthropologischen Gesellschaft Wien, 1938; standard equal-prior framing
ISFG Paternity Testing Commission 2007 on W = CPI / (CPI + 1) under equal prior; Butler 2015 Chapter 14
Open source - cited in 1 question
Goutam Kundu v. State of West Bengal, (1993) 3 SCC 418; Indian Evidence Act 1872, Section 112; Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023, Section 116
Goutam Kundu paras 26 and 27, articulating the strong-clear-and-conclusive standard for the non-access defence
Open source - cited in 1 question
Nandlal Wasudeo Badwaik v. Lata Nandlal Badwaik, (2014) 2 SCC 576
Supreme Court of India, Nandlal paras 12 to 19 on the relationship between DNA exclusion and the Section 112 IEA presumption
Open source - cited in 1 question
Dipanwita Roy v. Ronobroto Roy, (2015) 1 SCC 365; Indian Evidence Act 1872, Section 114 illustration (h); Hindu Marriage Act 1955, Section 13(1)(i)
Supreme Court of India, Dipanwita Roy paras 18 to 22 on adverse inference; Aparna Ajinkya Firodia v. Ajinkya Arun Firodia, (2023) 1 SCC 158 on child's welfare
Open source - cited in 1 question
Egeland T et al., Familias: a tool for paternity and kinship calculations, FSI Genetics, 2000 onwards
Reverse paternity LR construction in Butler 2015 Chapter 14 and Egeland et al., Relationship Inference with Familias and R, Elsevier 2016
Open source
How our mocks are built
Questions are written and edited by the ForensicSpot team and cited from peer-reviewed forensic textbooks, official syllabi and primary case law. Each one is verified before publishing. Detailed explanations show after you submit, so the test stays a real test. See a mistake? Tell us.
Common questions
What does the Disputed Paternity and Kinship: Statistical and Case Analysis (UGC-NET Unit III) mock cover?+
UGC-NET Forensic Science Unit III advanced drill on disputed paternity and kinship analysis. Hard-band scenario questions on Combined Paternity Index (CPI) across 15+ autosomal STR loci with Indian population allele frequencies, Probability of Paternity calculations under non-uniform priors, mutation rate handling (one-step paternal vs maternal mutations, stepwise mutation model), close-relative paternity (alleged father is brother of true father, half-sibling vs full-sibling distinction), rever
How many questions and how long is the test?+
30 multiple-choice questions, 30 minutes total. Difficulty: hard. Tier: Premium.
Who is this mock for?+
Forensic science students and aspirants who want timed, exam-style practice with explanations and verified source citations on NET. Useful for postgraduate entrance preparation and for BSc / MSc forensic students testing their recall under time.
Are the questions reviewed?+
Each question carries a verified source citation. Faculty review for individual questions is in progress.
Do I need an account to take this mock?+
Yes, a free ForensicSpot account is required to start a timed attempt — this lets you save progress, see per-question explanations after submission, and track your topic-level performance over time.