RAKESH GUPTA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition under sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is directed against the order of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 4, Jaipur City dated 23-9-1978.

(2.) BRIEF facts giving rise to this petition are that a First Information Report was lodged at the instance of Shri Shiv Charan, Additional District Supply Officer, Jaipur under section 420, IPC against the accused-petitioner for procuring 15 bags of cement by means of three permits, each permit was for 5 bags of cement. A case was registered at the Police Station, Bani Park, Jaipur, and the FIR was numbered as 174 dated 28-6-78. Shri Basir Mohammad, Sub-Inspector Police was investigating into the matter. Anticipatory bail was granted by the learned Sessions Judge, Jaipur City, Jaipur to the accused-petitioner on 22-7-1978. During the course of investigation, the accused was asked by the Investigating Agency to present himself in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate on 20-9-78. There he was asked to sign certain forms which he did. Shri Basir Mohammad, Sub-Inspector, it is said, again called the petitioner at the police station and asked him to sign some papers giving his handwriting and signatures. The accused-petitioner was again directed by the Investigating Agency to present himself before the Judicial Magistrate No. 4, Jaipur City and to give signatures and handwritings. The accused protested through his counsel Shri P. C. Jain, and contended that he was protected under Article 20 (3) of the Constitution of India not to give testimonial evidence against himself. The case was adjourned for hearing on 21-9-1978.

(3.) IN Keshavlal vs. State of Gujrat (1), it has been held as under: - "section 73 gives the Court a power to direct any person present in the Court to write any words or figures for the purpose of enabling the Court to compare the words or figures so written, with any words or figures alleged to have been written by such a person. Therefore, if an accused person is present in court, then powers given under the section can be used by the Court. But where the accused is not before the court and is let on bail pending investigation of the case against him the Magistrate has no power to ask the accused person to go to the police and give specimen of his signatures and handwriting. Magistrate and police officers can exercise only those powers which are prescribed under various laws and those powers cannot be enlarged. If there is no provision in the law for, the exercise of a power that power cannot be exercised by a Police Officer, or by a Magistrate or by a Judge. The police have got wide powers of investigation under Ss. 156 of Cr. P. C. but that does not mean that the police can compel an accused person to give his specimen signature and handwriting in exercise of such powers against the express provisions of S. 73 of Evidence Act. "