Back
HRISHIKESH ROY, MANOJ MISRA
Pravinsinh Nrupatsinh Chauhan – Appellant
Versus
State of Gujarat – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. concerns over voice sample collection rights. (Para 1) |
| 2. judicial orders on voice samples relate to privacy rights. (Para 2) |
| 3. magistrate’s power to order voice samples for investigations. (Para 3) |
| 4. affirmation of lower court's judgment on voice samples. (Para 4) |
| 5. dismissal of the special leave petition. (Para 5) |
ORDER :
1. Heard Mr.Tejas Barot, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. The primary grievance of the petitioner is that his voice sample is ordered to be collected for the purpose of comparison with the incriminatory voice sample available with the police. According to the counsel, unless rules are framed and appropriate standard operating system is notified under the provisions of the Criminal Procedure (Identification) Act, 2022 read with the Rules 2022, the collection of voice sample would impeach on the right of privacy of the accused.
2. In the above context, we have the benefit of reading the ratio in ' Ritesh Sinha Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh ' reported in 2019(8) SCC 1 where in the context of voice sample collected for the purpose of investigation, the three Judges Bench of this Court had held:-
The power of a judicial magistrate to order a person to give a sample of his voice for the purpose of investigation of a crime until explicit provisions are engrafted in the Code of Criminal Procedur....
Compelling to give voice samples does not infringe the right to privacy, and a Judicial Magistrate has the power to order a person to give a sample of his voice for the purpose of investigation of a ....
Compelling a person to give a sample of his voice for investigation purposes does not violate the fundamental right to privacy under Article 20(3) of the Constitution of India.
The right to privacy is not absolute and must bow down to compelling public interest. The Court conceded powers to the Judicial Magistrate to order giving of voice samples until explicit provisions a....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the power of a Judicial Magistrate to order a person to give a sample of his voice for the investigation of a crime is not confined merely to ....
The court ruled that compelling voice samples for investigation does not violate the right against self-incrimination under Article 20(3) of the Constitution.
Compelling a voice sample for investigation is lawful, even if the accused is not in custody, as privacy rights yield to public interest.
The right to privacy must bow down to compelling public interest, and certification under Section 65-B of the Act is needed when the recording is to be produced in trial as evidence.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
