GOLLA VARA PRASAD Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are A1 to A3 in Crime No.94 of 2010 dated 29.10.2013 of Mandavalli Police Station, Krishna District, Andhra Pradesh, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 417, 471 r/w 34 IPC. The crime is registered on the report of respondent No.2 by the police supra.

(2.) It is during investigation the Sub-Inspector of Police-respondent No.1 representing by the State filed Crl.M.P.No.2470 of 2013 before the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kaikaluru seeking a direction to the accused to appear before the Court and give specimen signatures and thumb impressions along with photographs of A2 and A3 for the purpose of investigation and to send the same to the Handwriting Expert in the interest of justice. A1 to A3 opposed the same and contested. The learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kaikaluru passed the order on 29.10.2013 allowing the petition by directing them to appear before the Court on 05.11.2013 and to give their specimen signatures and thumb impressions. A2 and A3 further directed to produce their photographs before the Court for the purpose of sending the same to the Handwriting Expert. The order was passed referring to Section 311-A Cr.P.C. Though it is contended of their signatures at the time of execution of the bail bonds available with Court if at all to send it is observed not a ground to refuse there from for no prejudice being caused to them and thereby, it is a fit case so to direct A1 to A3 to give specimen signatures and thumb impressions and the photographs of A2 and A3 for further investigation. The impugnment in the present petition is on the grounds that the said order is basically untenable and contrary to law and liable to be set aside.

(3.) In fact, from the very wording of Section 311-A Cr.P.C. that if a Magistrate is satisfied that, for the purpose of any investigation or proceeding under this Code, it is expedient to direct any person, including an accused person, to give specimen signatures or handwriting, he may make an order to that effect and in that case the person to whom the order relates shall be produced or shall attend at the time and place specified in such order and shall give his specimen signatures or handwriting. The proviso to it further speaks importantly that no order shall be made unless the person has at some time been arrested in connection with such investigation or proceeding. Paragraph No.10 of the order speaks about the contention of the petitioners-respondents before the lower Court as A1 to A3 that their signatures were obtained at the time of taking bonds and they are complying with the conditions in the bail bonds by attending the police station and those are available in the police station. Once such is the case, whether it amounts to arrest in connection with such investigation or proceeding is the issue?