(1.) Leave granted.
(2.) A purely academic question covered by a binding precedent of this Court, is agitated unnecessarily by the respondent herein and entertained egregiously by the High Court. The High Court has also refused to follow the binding precedent of this Court on the ground that there is a reference made to a Larger Bench. The reference, as pointed out by the appellant, has been closed unceremoniously, on default.
(3.) The records of the appeal reveal that a young married woman of 25 years of age died on 16/2/2021, which led to an allegation of harassment and torture at the matrimonial home and counter allegation that the deceased together with her parents misappropriated cash and jewellery belonging to the family of the husband. A cousin of the husband of the deceased filed a complaint before the police in which the deceased's father and mother were arrayed as accused. Upon investigation the Investigating Officer (I.O) was informed that the 2nd respondent acted as the agent of the father of the deceased and threatened a witness who alleged that he was privy to the extortion demand made by the father through the 2nd respondent. The I.O hence required the 2nd respondent to be subjected to a voice sample test for which collection of the voice sample was sought before the jurisdictional Magistrate's Court. To this end, a petition, Annexure P11 was filed before the jurisdictional Magistrate which was allowed by Annexure P13 order.