Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Immadabathuni Nagendramma vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 28 August, 2023
Bench: S. Ravindra Bhat, Aravind Kumar
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO............OF 2023
(Arising out of S.L.P.(Crl.) No. 1198 of 2019)
IMMADABATHUNI NAGENDRAMMA & ORS. .....Appellant(s)
Vs.
THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ORS. .....Respondent(s)
O R D E R
Leave granted.
Despite service of notice, there is no appearance on behalf of any of the respondent.
The appellants are before this Court aggrieved by the order of the Additional Junior Civil Judge, Bapatla directing – in their absence the drawing of blood samples to test their DNA. This was in the background of allegations that one Kathi David Raju and relied upon a forged or fabricated caste certificate when in fact he is not a member of any Schedule Tribe. It was alleged further that the first appellant was his biological mother and the other two appellants were his biological siblings.
The police authorities moved an application during the course Signature Not Verified of investigation on the basis of mere allegations, to direct the Digitally signed by NEETA SAPRA Date: 2023.09.01 19:14:46 IST Reason: drawing of blood samples from the appellants which they were 1 aggrieved by. They sought for the recall of such order but unsuccessfully. Their plea before the High Court was also not of any avail In these circumstances, they approached this Court.
It appears that the accused - Kathi David Raju; who was implicated in the criminal proceedings as an accused, too was directed to give blood samples against which he approached the High Court, again unsuccessfully. His appeal by special leave [Criminal Appeal No. 1186 of 2019 Kathi David Raju vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh & Anr.] was allowed. The Court observed pertinently as follows:
“It is the submission of learned counsel for the respondent that Section 53 Cr.P.C empowers the police authorities to request a medical practitioner to conduct examination of a person. There cannot be any dispute to the provision empowering police authorities to make such a request. Present is a case where without carrying out any substantial investigation, the police authorities had jumped on the conclusion that DNA test should be obtained. It was too early to request for conduct of DNA test without carrying out substantial investigation by the police authorities. The Additional Junior Civil Judge also failed to notice that in the investigation conducted by the Investigating Authority no such materials have been brought on the basis of which it could have been opined that conducting DNA test is necessary for the appellant on his mother and two brothers.
We, thus, are of the view that the order passed by the Additional Junior Civil Judge dated 22.01.2016 was unsustainable. The High Court committed error in not setting aside the said order in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
In result, we allow the appeal, set aside the 2 impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court as well as the order of the Additional Junior Civil Judge dated 22.01.2016. It shall, however, be open for the Court concerned to consider the request for conducting DNA test on there being sufficient materials on record to take any such decision.” In these circumstances and having regard to these developments, the present appeal has to follow the same route. The impugned order of the High Court and Civil Judge are hereby set aside. The appeal is allowed.
...................J. (S. RAVINDRA BHAT) ....................J. (ARAVIND KUMAR) New Delhi;
August 28, 2023.
3
ITEM NO.42 COURT NO.5 SECTION II
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 1198/2019
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 02-08-2018 in CRLP No. 6083/2018 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh) IMMADABATHUNI NAGENDRAMMA & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 28-08-2023 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR For Petitioner(s) Mr. Anand Padmanabhan R., Adv.
Mr. V. Sridhar Reddy, Adv.
Mr. Abhijit Sengupta, AOR Mrs. Kuheli Mitra, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Mahfooz Ahsan Nazki, AOR Mr. Polanki Gowtham, Adv.
Mr. T Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy, Adv.
Ms. Niti Richhariya, Adv.
Mr. Meeran Maqbool, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Leave granted.
The appeal is allowed in terms of signed order.
All pending applications are disposed of.
(NEETA SAPRA) (BEENA JOLLY) COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH)
(Signed order is placed on the file) 4