MUKESH AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present petition lays challenge to order dated 11.07.2013, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Panipat, whereby application filed by the petitioners for summoning the witnesses and to send copies of CDs to Forensic Science Laboratory, Madhuban (for brevity, 'FSL') for inspection and to prove conversation recorded in the CDs, has been dismissed. Counsel for the petitioners submits that as analysis of conversion between Gulshan and Surender, recorded in the CDs, is a material piece of evidence, essential to just decision of the case, in which the petitioners have been charge -sheeted for commission of offence under section 304 -B of Indian Penal Code in regard to death of Sushma wife of Mukesh, the learned trial Court has wrongly rejected the prayer of the petitioners and dismissed the application. It is further submitted that the application of the petitioners may be allowed, the trial Court may be directed to obtain voice sample of Surender and thereafter, CDs containing conversion between Gulshan and Surender and voice sample of Surender, be sent to FSL, for examination and report.

(2.) I have heard counsel for the petitioners and perused the records.

(3.) IN the case in hand, the application was submitted before the Court of Additional Sessions Judge. A reading of Section 311A of the Code would make it explicitly clear that only a Magistrate is empowered to order any person to give specimen signatures or handwriting. Counsel for the petitioners has failed to invite attention of this Court to any provision in the Code, which empowers the trial Court to direct any person to give voice sample.