ORDER :

All three Criminal Original Petitions filed to set aside the order, dated 31.07.2020, made in Crl.M.P.No.7652 of 2019 in C.C.No.37 of 2017, passed by the learned Principal Special Judge for CBI Cases, Chennai, directing the petitioners to appear on the date, time and place to be specified in writing by the Investigating Officer and give voice samples as required for the purpose of further investigation of the case.

2. Since all the cases are arising out of the same order, this Court decides to dispose the above petitions by way of common order. For the sake of convenience and clarity, the petitioners are referred to as accused, as per their ranks, in the charge sheet.

3.The gist of the case is that A1 who was working as Senior Supervisor of Employees Provident Fund Organization (EPFO), Government of India, Regional Office, Chennai conspired with his younger brother A2, the Managing Director of M/s.Efficient Management Consultants and some other private companies during the period 2014-2015 to cheat the EPFO by avoiding payments of contributions, other dues and penalties by way of dishonestly submitting bogus and fabricated provident fund returns in respect of the companies concerned. A1 entered into a criminal conspiracy with the companies concerned with the help of his brother/A2. Further, A1 for reducing EPF liability had created bogus and fabricated documents with the help of A2. In pursuant to it, A1 received illegal gratification for the said purpose through the consultancy of his brother/A2 and the amounts were received through the personal bank accounts of A1 and his wife/A3. A case was registered in the year 2016 and charge sheet came to be filed in the year 2017, which was taken on file in C.C.No.37 of 2017 by the trial Court. In this case, during trial, some of the accused have filed discharge petitions and the same were pending. The respondent Police filed a petition under Section 173(8) of Cr.P.C., for further investigation in Crl.M.P.No.2046 of 2018 and the same was allowed by order, dated 02.05.2018. Subsequently, another petition in Crl.M.P.No.7652 of 2019 was filed by the respondent Police to obtain voice samples of A1, A2, A4, A5, A7, A9 and A11. After detailed arguments on either side, the trial Court, by order, dated 31.07.2020 in Crl.M.P.No.7652 of 2019 in C.C.No.37 of 2017 permitted the respondent to take voice samples and directed the petitioners to appear before the Investigating Officer for giving their voice samples, against which the present Criminal Original Petitions have been filed.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner/A1 in Crl.O.P.No.13526 of 2020 submitted that A1 was not arrested by the respondent at any point time during the course of the investigation in this case. On receipt of the summon, A1 appeared before the trial Court. The learned counsel further submitted that there is no provision either in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 or in the Identification of the Prisoners Act, 1920, for recording the voice samples from the accused person or any other person. The trial Court failed to consider the difference between the arrested person and the person, who is in custody. It is an admitted fact that A1 was not arrested by the respondent at any point of time during the course of investigation. On receipt of summon, he appeared before the trial Court, surrendered, executed the bond and sureties. Further, as per Sections 311A and 53 of Cr.P.C., and Section 5 of the Identification of the Prisoners Act, 1920 “no order shall be made under this Section unless the person has sometime being arrested in connection with such investigation or proceedings.” The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of “Ritesh Sinha Versus State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors., reported in (2019) 8 SCC 1”, empowered the Magistrate to order a person to give a sample of his voice for the purpose of investigation of a crime. In this case, on completion of investigation, charge sheet came to be filed in the year 2017 and thereaf