IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY THE TWENTYNINTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3244 OF 2009 Between: Gandhari Gopi … Petitioner-Accused V/s. The State of Andhra Pradesh Represented by its Public Prosecutor High Court of Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad … Respondent-Complainant Counsel for the Petitioner : Sri K.Venu Madhav Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : Addl.Public Prosecutor Counsel for the Respondent No.2 : None appeared THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3244 OF 2009 O R D E R : This Criminal Petition is filed to quash the order in Crl.MP.No. 172 of 2009 in Crime No. 375 of 2005 of Armoor Police Station on the file of the Court of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Armoor, Nizamabad district. 2. Heard Sri K.Venu Madhav, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State. 3. The brief facts necessary to examine the correctness and legality of the order passed by the learned Magistrate may be stated as follows: One Smt. Manjula, hereinafter referred to as the “deceased”, is the wife of Rajeshwar, whose marriage was performed about 12 years prior to the incident, which took place on 28-9-2008. It is said that after the marriage, she gave birth to a male child and subsequently the said child died. Her husband Rajeshwar has been residing in Dubai and she went there for three months and she came back to her native place. It is also said that the relatives of the husband were harassing her on the ground that she was not begetting the children. Ultimately while she was at her inlaws place went at Fathepur village she died on 28-09-2008 by committing suicide. Thereafter on a report lodged by the father of the deceased in Armoor Police Station. Initially a case under section 174 of Cr.P.C. was registered and subsequently it was altered to one under section 498-A and 306 of IPC making the relatives of the husband as accused. During the course of investigation, the Sub-Inspector of Police, Armoor filed requisition before the Judicial Magistrarte of First Class, Armoor to collect blood samples in Crime No. 375 of 2008 registered for the offences under section 498-A and 306 of IPC. 4. The basis for the requisition made by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Armoor is that the postmortem examination on the dead body of the deceased revealed that she was pregnant and that the investigating agency wanted to ascertain as to who is responsible for the pregnancy and therefore the petitioner who is said to be suspected in this case has to undergo DNA test to compare the result with the analysis of foetus preserved with the FSL Hyderabad. The learned Magistrate referring to Section 53 Cr.P.C., dealing with examination of accused by medical practitioner at the request of police officer and also section 311 (A) Cr.P.C., dealing with power of Magistrate to order person to give specimen signature or handwriting allowed the requisition sought for by the Sub- Inspector of Police, he directed the petitioner to give blood samples for the purpose of DNA test. To quash the said order, the present criminal petition is filed. 5. Here it requires to be noticed that the petitioner is not the accused in Crime No. 375 of 2008 registered under sections 498-A and 306 of IPC. The case was registered against the relatives of the husband of the deceased and the investigation was going on. There is no allegation against the petitioner that he was responsible for commission of suicide by the deceased. The Sub-Inspector of Police, Armoor merely mentioned in the requisition filed before the learned Magistrate that the petitioner and one Laxman are suspects and their blood samples are required for conducting DNA test. Laxman is no other than the brother of the deceased. The petitioner is totally stranger to the family of the deceased and he cannot be said to be the relative of her husband. In any event, there is no allegation against the petitioner that he was responsible for commission of suicide by the deceased. Article 20 (3) of the Constitution lays down that no person accused of any offence shall be compelled to be a witness against himself. 6. In the instant case, the petitioner is not even accused of the offence in Crime No. 375 of 2008 of Armoor Police Station. Moreover even if the paternity of the child in the womb of the deceased is established it has nothing to do with the proof of the offence under section 498-A and 306 of IPC. The petitioner is not related to the husband of the deceased. 7. Under these circumstances, I am of the considered view that compelling the petitioner to give blood samples for the purpose of conducting the DNA test is absolutely unnecessary for investigation in the present case. Having regard to the circumstances of the present case, the court cannot compel the petitioner to undergo DNA test or give blood samples investigation. The order passed by the learned Magistrate is therefore misconceived and is liable to be quashed. 8. Accordingly the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Armoor in Crl.MP.No. 172 of 2009, dated 23-4-2009 is quashed and the criminal petition is allowed. __________________________ JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO. 29-09-2011 I s L THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3244 OF 2009 CIRCULATION No.25 Date: 29-09-2011 Court Master: I s L Computer No. 43