Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
ASHA MENON
Sunil Kumar alias Titu – Appellant
Versus
State of UT of Chandigarh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments regarding voice sample compliance (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. court's observations on past findings (Para 8 , 13) |
| 4. legal reasoning on voice samples (Para 17 , 18) |
| 5. conclusion and dismissal of petition (Para 19 , 20 , 21) |
ORDER
1. This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, "Cr.P.C.") by one of the accused persons in FIR No.194/2017, registered under Sections 409/420/120B IPC and Sections 8/9/13(1)(d)/13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, at Police Station Sector 3, Chandigarh.
2. The case relates to the leaking of the question paper set for "Haryana Civil Services (Judicial) (Preliminary) Examination-2017". The FIR has been registered on the directions of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana. The Special Investigating Team (for short, "SIT") was also constituted for investigating into the case. The accused persons were arrested, and vide orders dated 12th October, 2018, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana granted interim bail to the accused, including the present petitioner. By means of various petitions, some of the accused approached the Supreme Court se
The court upheld the legality of compelling a voice sample post-charge framing, reinforcing that such actions do not violate constitutional rights when properly ordered during investigations.
The court affirmed the authority of the court to order a person to give a sample of his voice for the purposes of investigation of a crime, and upheld the legality of such orders under Fundamental Ri....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the admissibility of recorded conversation and the power of the Court to obtain voice samples of the witnesses under Section 91 of the CrPC.
Electronic Evidence - As per Section 79A, Central Government may, for purpose of providing expert opinion on electronic from evidence before any Court or other authority specify, by notification in O....
The collection of voice samples for forensic analysis, when conducted lawfully and with consent, does not violate the right to privacy or the principle against self-incrimination under the Constituti....
The fundamental right to privacy cannot be construed as absolute and must bow down to compelling public interest. The admissibility of memory card evidence without certification under Section 65-B of....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the direction to give a voice sample did not violate the right against self-incrimination and the right to privacy, and the admissibility of e....
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
