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.

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 seeking transfer of the matters from Chandigarh to Delhi. These petitions were allowed vide orders dated 5th February, 2021 and the cases were transferred to Delhi, where the trial is presently pending.

3. After the cases were transferred to Delhi, the petitioner sought directions from the learned Special Judge to the police not to compel the petitioner to give his voice sample. Vide order dated 2nd July, 2022, the Principal District & Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge (PC Act) (CBI), Rouse Avenue District Court, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the "Special Judge") declined to issue any such directions observing that assuming that the High Court of Punjab and Haryana had granted liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh petition before the High Court of Delhi, the petitioner had not done so till that date, and in any case, the time granted by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana also stood expired and thus, directed the petitioner, being accused No.5, to give his voice sample in terms of the previous order dated 26th September, 2018, also fixing the date for the purpose as 11th July, 2022 at CFSL, Sector-36, Chandigarh.

4. The instant petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking the quashing of the orders dated 26th September, 2018, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chandigarh and the consequential orders dated 2nd July, 2022 passed by the learned Special Judge. The order dated 26th September, 2018 permitted the SIT to obtain the voice sample of the petitioner. On 22nd November, 2018, the petitioner moved the learned Trial Court at Chandigarh to issue appropriate directions to the police not to compel the petitioner to give his voice sample. The plea taken was that he was in judicial custody on 31st August, 2018 and was not in a proper state of mind due to acute mental depression and had, therefore, suffered the statement, agreeing to furnish his voice sample to the SIT. Since the learned Trial Court dismissed that application vide orders dated 8th January, 2019, the petitioner approached the High Court of Punjab and Haryana by moving CRM-M No. 2606 of 2019 under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of the said order dated 8th January, 2019, passed by the learned Trial Court, Chandigarh. It is the contention of Dr. Malkit Singh Jandiala, learned counsel for petitioner, that the instant petition has been filed in the light of the orders passed by the Supreme Court on 22nd February, 2021 granting such a liberty to the petitioner, which has also been recorded by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in its order dated 29th April, 2022.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has forcefully urged that compelling the petitioner to give his voice sample to the SIT violated the petitioner's Fundamental Rights, particularly, under Artic