Back
SAMEER JAIN
Badri Prasad Meena Son of Shri Moola Meena – Appellant
Versus
Central Bureau of Investigation through PP – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sameer Jain, J.
1. The present petition is filed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. 2023, assailing the impugned order dated 04.09.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Case No. 34/2024, arising out of FIR, qua which directions were issued for recording of voice sample of the accused-petitioners by the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Jaipur Metropolitan-1 on 20.09.2024.
2. Bereft of elaborate details, the brief facts giving rise to the instant petition are that a complaint was registered with the Anti-Corruption Bureau (for short ‘ACB’) against the accused-petitioners wherein, allegations qua clearing bills of contractors for a consideration of one percent commission, which constitutes as illegal enrichment and gratifications. For the said allegation an FIR was made to be registered on 10.11.2022 for the offences under Section 120-B of IPC read with Section 7-A and 8 of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 (amended by 2018 Act). Thereafter, the Investigation Agency after thorough investigation has submitted a charge sheet against the accused-petitioners wherein, voice recording was collected by the investigating agency qua the exchange of communication between the employees and
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.
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 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....
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.
The directive to provide a voice sample for comparison in a criminal investigation does not violate the constitutional protection against self-incrimination.
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
