A RESIDENT of Ngwenya Township in Livingstone is seeking compensation from a man he alleges impregnated his daughter.
Felix Misebi sued 26-year-old Samuel Mapulanga.
The complainant told the local court that Mapulanga had failed to take responsibility for the pregnancy of his daughter, Mulenga, despite being summoned several times by the family to resolve the matter. He said efforts to engage Mapulanga outside court proved futile as the defendant allegedly ignored repeated summons.
“I summoned him several times so that we could resolve the issue as a family, but he never showed up, leaving me with no option but to bring the matter before the court,” Misebi said.
But Mapulanga denied responsibility for the pregnancy, telling the court that while he had been involved in a sexual relationship with Mulenga, he was not convinced that he was the one responsible.
“I do not think the pregnancy is mine,” Mapulanga said, adding that Mulenga used to visit him at his barbershop, where she would watch films and spend time with him.
He admitted that the two had engaged in sexual intercourse on several occasions without using protection but insisted that this did not necessarily mean he was responsible for the pregnancy.
Mapulanga also acknowledged that he did not respond to the family’s summons, but did not state his reasons for doing so.
Testifying before the court, Mulenga said she is five months pregnant and named Mapulanga as the person responsible.
She told the court that she and Mapulanga were involved in a sexual relationship.
She said they never used protection during their sexual encounters.
Senior local court magistrate Esau Daka, sitting with principal presiding local court magistrate Mubita Mubiana, guided the parties on the legal position, stating that causing a pregnancy is not a criminal offence.
Magistrate Daka observed that, in line with cultural practices in Zambia, families often refrain from fully discussing matters relating to pregnancy before the birth of a child.
He said the court would allow the pregnancy to progress before making a final determination on paternity and related responsibilities.
The court adjourned the matter and directed both parties to keep detailed records of all expenses incurred during the pregnancy and after the birth of the child.
Magistrate Mubiana said that should Mapulanga continue to dispute paternity, a DNA test would be conducted after the child is born to establish the truth.
In the interim, the court ordered Mapulanga to provide financial support towards the pregnancy and upkeep of the expectant mother.
The court further ruled that if it is later established through a DNA test that Mapulanga is not the father, he would be refunded any money spent on the pregnancy.
The matter was adjourned to a later date for further hearing.
-ZDM