JUDGMENT

THAKKAR, J.:— Constitutional validity of a part of a provision enjoining a police officer engaged in an investigation under Chapter XII of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr. P.C.) has been called into question. The provision which so enjoins an investigation officer if embodied in Section 172, Clause (1) whereof imposes the duty. It is a part of this provision namely Clause (3) which is the target of the challenge made by one of the two accused in a criminal case. The High Court having repulsed the challenge, the accused have approached this Court by way of the present petition in order to reiterate the challenge on the premise that the High Court had erred in sustaining the validity of the impugned provision.

2. The analysis of Section 172*1, Clause (3) whereof has given rise to the challenge to its constitutionality reveals :

(1) That it embodies a complete scheme relating to the matter of maintaining a diary.

(2) Clause (1) imposes the obligation to do so and provides for the contents thereof.

(3) The Court is empowered to call for such diaries to aid it in inquiry or trial subject to the rider that it cannot be used as evidence thereat.

(4) Merely because the Court calls f