Neutral Citation Number 2022/DHC/005567

$~25 & 26

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+

CRL.M.C. 2242/2019, CRL.M.A. 8959/2019

OM PRAKASH

..... Petitioner

Through:

Mr.Dinesh Garg, Advocate

versus

STATE

..... Respondent

Through:

Mr.Raghvinder Verma, APP for the

State with Insp.Manjusha,

PS R.K.Puram.

26 +

CRL.M.C. 5010/2019 & CRL.M.A. 37336/2019

SMT. PINKY

..... Petitioner

Through:

Mr.Shantanu Bhardwaj, advocate

versus

STATE

..... Respondent

Through:

Mr.Raghvinder Verma, APP for the

State with Insp.Manjusha,

PS R.K.Puram.

%

Date of Decision: 14.12.2022

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SHARMA

J U D G M E N T

DINESH KUMAR SHARMA, J. (Oral)

1.

Present petitions have been filed challenging the order dated

18.03.2019 by the learned trial court whereby the learned trial court

inter alia directed that the CD Ex.PW-12/Article-1 and the Pen Drive

Digitally Signed

By:PALLAVI VERMA

Signing Date:15.12.2022

15:50:10

Signature Not Verified

Neutral Citation Number 2022/DHC/005567

Kingston 8GB Ex.PW8/Article-1 be sent to the FSL Rohini (1) for

comparison of the face of the complainant as well as for the face

recognition of the accused (2) to compare the voice of the complainant

with the questioned voice in CD Ex.PW-12/Article-1 as well as in Pen

Drive Ex.PW-8/Article-1 (3) to compare the voice of the accused with

the question voice in CD Ex.PW-12/Article-1 as well as in Pen Drive

Ex.PW-8/Article-1.

2.

Learned trial court further directed that the accused shall not be made

to read any inculpatory statement or transcript of the conversation in

question but shall be made to read out words and sentences which are

not inculpatory and are not the exact reproduction of the transcript.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits as far as these directions are

concerned, he does not wish to challenge. Learned counsel submits

that his grievance is that learned trial court directed SHO, PS

R.K.Puram to appoint an officer, not below the rank of Inspector for

compliance of the above order and to take steps to ensure the presence

of the accused as well as complainant Ms.Pinki before the Director,

FSL, Rohini for recording of their sample voice as well as for taking of

their photographs for face recognition/comparison.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner cannot be

taken forcibly by a police official to the FSL for giving the sample

voice

as

well

as

for

giving

his

photographs

for

face

recognition/comparison. Learned counsel submits that in case the

petitioner does not comply with the directions of the court, an adverse

inference, at the best, may be drawn.

Digitally Signed

By:PALLAVI VERMA

Signing Date:15.12.2022

15:50:10

Signature Not Verified

Neutral Citation Number 2022/DHC/005567

5.

Learned APP for the State has submitted that learned trial court has

passed the reasoned order and there is no reason to interfere in the

same.

6.

In Ashok Kumar vs. Raj Gupta & Ors., Civil Appeal No.6153/2021

vide order dated 01.10.2021 the Supreme Court has inter alia held as

under:

plaintiff is without exception.”

7.

I consider that the petitioner cannot be compelled or be taken forcibly

to the Director, FSL for giving voice sample or for giving his

photographs. It goes without saying that if petitioner fails to give his

voice sample or his photograph for comparison or the order dated

18.03.2019, certainly an adverse inference can be drawn against him.

Digitally Signed

By:PALLAVI VERMA

Signing Date:15.12.2022

15:50:10

Signature Not Verified

Neutral Citation Number 2022/DHC/005567

The petitioner may choose not to comply with the order subject to

having the risk of suffering an adverse inference.

8.

The learned trial court may accordingly appreciate the evidence with all

attendant circumstances in accordance with the law at the time of final

adjudication of the matter in dispute.

9.

The impugned order is modified