R MOTHYA NAIK Vs. STATE OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) R.Mothya Naik, the petitioner in the present criminal petition filed under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter to as 'Code' for the purpose of convenience) had questioned the order dt.10-3-2003 made in M.P.No.603/2003 in Cr.No.134/2002 made by the XXI Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad. It is stated that the petitioner is A.I in Cr.No.134/2002 and in pursuance of F.I.R. lodged with C.C.S., Detective Department, Hyderabad, it was alleged that he had committed offences under Sections 420, 468, 471, 409, 120-B I.P.C. and under Sections 3 and 4 of Criminal Law (Amendment) Ordinance 1944. The Investigating Officer after completing the entire investigation filed the charge-sheet before the Court of learned XXI Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad and the same was returned on the ground that it was not filed in accordance with the provisions of Section 173 of the Code. While the matter stood thus, the Investigating Officer filed an application M.P.No.609/2003 before the learned XXI Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, praying for a direction from the learned Metropolitan Magistrate to direct the petitioner to give his specimen handwriting and specimen signatures. The learned Metropolitan Magistrate issued summons to the petitioner to be present on 4-3-2003 for giving his specimen signatures and the specimen handwriting. The main ground of objection raised by the petitioner is that the specimen signatures and specimen handwriting cannot be obtained from him for the purpose of investigation. Despite the objection raised by the petitioner, the application was allowed. It is also further stated that inasmuch as the investigation was completed, the Investigating Officer should have obtained permission under Section 178 (3) of the Code and in view of the same M.P.No.609/03 itself is not maintainable. The learned Magistrate recorded reasons in detail and ultimately came to the conclusion that in the light of Sections 73 and 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, such directions can be issued and accordingly directed the petitioner to be present on 17-3-2003 before the Court and to give his specimen handwritings and signatures to send the same to Director, Forensic Science Laboratory for comparison and opinions of Experts.

(2.) IT is not in serious controversy between the parties that the investigation in the crime was completed and the police had laid the charge-sheet before the Court. IT is needless to say that investigation is something different from enquiry. Section 173 of the Code deals with report of police officer on completion of investigation and Section 173 (8) of the code reads as hereunder:-