Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

1.By way of this petition, the petitioner challenges the letter issued by the respondent No.2­Investigating Agency to the petitioner asking him to remain present at the Forensic Science Laboratory ('the FSL' hereinafter) for Voice Spectrography Test on 20.12.2018.

2. The first information report being I­ C.R.NO.03 of 2018 came to be lodged by the complainant on 11.08.2018 with A.C.B. Police Station, Anand, for the offences punishable under Section 8 of the Prevention of Corruptions Act stating therein that the R/SCR.A/10292/2018 ORDER complainant is a civil contractor and a partner of a proprietary firm called 'Maruti Infra' had entered into a work contract for a company by name Bindra Infrastructure on 26.11.2017.

4.A letter has been issued to the petitioner on 07.10.2018 by the Police Inspector, Kheda A.C.B.Police Station for giving a voice sample for the Voice Spectrography Test. Another letter has been issued on 04.11.2018 by the Police Inspector, Kheda A.C.B. Police Station on 04.11.2018 informing the petitioner that if he does not remain present for giving Voice Spectrography Test, it will be presumed that he agrees to the voice in the audio­video recorded C.D. and further course of action will be resorted to him.

deemed just and proper looking to the facts of this case may kindly be granted in favour of the petitioner in the interest of justice."

7. This Court on 20.11.2018 had issued notice and directed the Investigating Officer to remain present with the papers of investigation before this Court. Today, the Investigating Officer is present and on instructions, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that during the course of the investigation, the Investigating Officer had required the voice test of the present petitioner and therefore, two communications have been sent to him. It is the right of the Investigating Officer to ask the petitioner­accused for the voice sample for Spectrography Test. Nothing beyond is intended in the communication. She has also denied that there is any compulsion to R/SCR.A/10292/2018 ORDER the petitioner to give his evidence against himself violating his right to self preservation. She has reiterated that no compulsion has been asserted in communicating to him the requirement of the voice sample for the Voice Spectrography Test. She also, on a query raised by the Court, has pleaded not to have any instructions with regard to the making of the rules in this regard. Consequent upon the judgment of this Court in case of Natvarlal Amarshibhai Devani vs. State of Gujarat & Anr., reported in 2017 1 GLH 576, both the sides have agreed that said decision has not been challenged before the Apex Court and so far no specific provisions have been made nor any rules made in this regard.

"101.

                 [a]       The   Voice     Spectrography             Test       does
                 not         fall    within           the     ambit         of      a
                 psychiatric             treatment.               The           Voice
                 Spectrography           Test         is     in    no      manner
                 violative          of     Article           20(3)       of      the
                 Constitution of India.

                 [b]       However,      in         the     absence       of     any