Leave granted.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties.
This appeal has been filed against the judgment dated
04.06.2018 dismissing the application under Section 482 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) filed by the appellant for quashing
the order dated 22.01.2016 passed by the Additional Junior Civil
Judge, Bapatla. The High Court by the impugned judgment has
dismissed the application under Section 482, Cr.P.C. Brief facts
giving rise to this appeal are:
Respondent No.2 filed First Information Report dated
06.01.2016 under Sections 465, 468, 471 and 420 IPC against the
appellant. The substance of the allegation in the FIR was that the
appellant has obtained a fake Scheduled Caste certificate of caste
Signature‘Yanadi’Not Verified whereas he belonged to ‘Telanga’ caste. It was further SANJAY KUMAR
obtained employment and working as Additional Assistant Engineer in
V.T.P.S. Electricity Generation Corporation. The original name of
the appellant is ‘Immadabathina Veeranjaneyulu s/o Venkata
Kotaiah’. The appellant has changed his name as ‘Kathi David Raju
son of Yedulcondalu’. It is further pleaded that two children of
the appellant had also obtained fake caste certificate of ‘Yanadi’
caste. On the basis of FIR, the appellant was arrested on
11.01.2016 and sent for judicial remand. On 13.01.2016, an
application was filed before the Additional Junior Civil Judge,
Bapatla requesting that the Court may direct conducting of DNA test
of the appellant, the mother of the appellant and the two brothers
of the appellant. The Additional Junior Civil Judge by order dated
22.01.2016 directed for conducting DNA test at the request made by
the Station House Officer (SHO), Bapatla Town Police Station.
Aggrieved by the order dated 22.01.2016 passed by the
Additional Junior Civil Judge, an application under Section 482,
Cr.P.C. has been filed by the appellant in the High Court praying
for quashing of order dated 22.01.2016 which has been dismissed by
the High Court by the impugned judgment.
Learned counsel for the appellant contends that the learned
Magistrate committed error in directing for conducting DNA test on
insufficient grounds and material. The Investigation Authorities
have not completed the investigation and as roving and fishing
enquiry, they cannot be permitted to conduct DNA test on the
appellant. It is further submitted that respondent No.2 is claimed
to be an office bearer of fake association who due to personal ill-
will against the appellant has lodged FIR questioning the caste
certificate of the appellant. It is submitted that there is an
enactment viz. The Andhra Pradesh (SC, ST and BCs) Regulation of
Issue of Community Certificates Act, 1993 under which there is a
provision for cancellation of false community certificate,
provision of penalty and other relevant provisions. The FIR lodged
by respondent No.2 was an act of malice and it was with an intent
to harass the appellant.
Learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that the
police authorities had rightly requested the Court for permitting
them to conduct DNA test since the allegations in the FIR have been
made that the appellant is son of ‘Venkat Kotaiah’ whereas he
claimed to be son of ‘Yedulcondalu’. It is also submitted that
Section 53 Cr.P.C. empowers the police officer to request for DNA
test.
We have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for
the parties and perused the record.
As noted above, the FIR was lodged on 06.01.2016 where the
allegation against the appellant was of obtaining a false caste
certificate of Scheduled Caste with a further allegation that he
originally belonged to ’Telanga’ caste. The appellant was arrested
on 11.01.2016 and on 13.01.2016 itself, the SHO submitted an
application in the Court of Additional Junior Civil Judge for
permitting conducting of DNA test on which impugned order was
passed. The impugned order itself noted the following submission:-
“The learned APP submitted that the investigation not
yet completed and material evidence yet to be collected
and also police custody is required to complete the
investigation. Further contended that the DNA test in
between the accused No.1 and mother of the accused No.1
along with family members of the accused No.1 is most
required to prove the blood relationship in between the
accused NO.1 and mother of parental relatives of the
accused NO.1. Hence, the learned APP request the court
to allow the petition for examine respondent /accused
for DNA test.”
There can be no dispute to the right of police authorities to
seek permission of the Court for conducting DNA test in an
appropriate case. In the present case, FIR alleges obtaining false
caste certificate by the appellant by changing his name and
parentage. The order impugned itself notices that investigation is
not yet completed and material evidence are yet to be collected.
The police authorities without being satisfied on material
collected or conducting substantial investigation have requested
for DNA test which is nothing but a step towards roving and fishing
enquiry on a person, his mother and brothers. It is a serious
matter which should not be lightly to be resorted to without there
being appropriate satisfaction for requirement of such test.
It is the submission of learned counsel for the respondent
that Section 53 Cr.P.C empowers the police authorities to request a
medical practitioner to conduct examination of a person. There
cannot be any dispute to the provision empowering police
authorities to make such a request. Present is a case where
without carrying out any substantial investigation, the police
authorities had jumped on the conclusion that DNA test should be
obtained. It was too early to request for conduct of DNA test
without carrying out substantial investigation by the police
authorities. The Additional Junior Civil Judge also failed to
notice that in the investigation conducted by the Investigating
Authority no such materials have been brought on the basis of which
it could have been opined that conducting DNA test is necessary for
the appellant on his mother and two brothers.
We, thus, are of the view that the order passed by the
Additional Junior Civil Judge dated 22.01.2016 was unsustainable.
The High Court committed error in not setting aside the said order
in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
In result, we allow the appeal, set aside the impugned
judgment and order passed by the High Court as well as the order of
the Additional Junior Civil Judge dated 22.01.2016. It shall,
however, be open for the Court concerned to consider the request
for conducting DNA test on there being sufficient materials on
record to take any such decision.
The appeal is allowed to the above extent.
( NAVIN SINHA ) New Delhi, August 05,2019.