SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1977 Supreme(AP) 185

A.SAMBASIVA RAO
Ananth Kumar Naik – Appellant
Versus
State Of A. P. – Respondent


( 1 ) IF an accused person is directed to undergo blood and seminal test for the purpose of investigation, would it amount to testimonial compulsion coming within the prohibition laid down, in Article 20 (3) of the Constitution ? Whether such a process of investigation would be tantamount to inflicting torture and pain on the person of the accused ? Whether there is any provision in the Criminal Procedure Code, to direct an accused person to give samples of his blood and semen and whether the Criminal Court has jurisdiction to give such a direction ? These are the questions that arise for consideration in this petition.

( 2 ) THE 5th accused has filed this petition challenging the dirction of the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, that the 5th accused do appear before the director of Forensic Laboratory, Hyderabad , to enable that Director to take samples of blood and semen. This is a direction granted by the learned Sessions Judge on a petition made by the prosecution under sectior 482, Criminal Procedure Code, for the above direction not only in regard to the 5th accused, who is the present petitioner, but also the first accused so that the prosecution could complete the inv



















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top