RITESH SINHA Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH
LAWS(SC)-2019-8-5
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: ALLAHABAD)
Decided on
August 02,2019
RITESH SINHA
Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH
Respondents
Referred Judgements :-
STATE OF BOMBAY VS. KATHI KALU OGHAD [REFERRED TO]VATAL NAGARAJ VS. R DAYANAND SAGAR [REFERRED TO]
SUSHIL KUMAR SEN VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
BANGALORE WATER SUPPLY AND SEWERAGE BOARD VS. A.RAJAPPA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. RAM BABU MISRA [REFERRED TO]
MODERN DENTAL COLLEGE AND RESEARCH CENTRE VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
Cited Judgements :-
THANKAPPAN V. E. VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2022-9-262] [REFERRED TO]N.MANIVANNAN VS. STATE [LAWS(MAD)-2021-9-51] [REFERRED TO]
KAMAL PAL VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2021-7-270] [REFERRED TO]
JIL W/O. PRIYANK CHOKSI VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2024-7-110] [REFERRED TO]
PRAVINSINH NRUPATSINH CHAUHAN VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(SC)-2023-5-125] [REFERRED TO]
ANKIT KHANDELWAL VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2021-8-198] [REFERRED TO]
OMKAR SAPRE VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2023-3-123] [REFERRED TO]
RAM UDAGAR MAHTO VS. STATE [LAWS(DLH)-2021-9-261] [REFERRED TO]
ANEESH VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(KER)-2024-7-215] [REFERRED TO]
INDO ASIAN NEWS CHANNEL PVT LTD VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2023-4-66] [REFERRED TO]
SWARAN SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2022-9-106] [REFERRED TO]
SUNIL KUMAR VS. STATE OF UT OF CHANDIGARH [LAWS(DLH)-2022-8-29] [REFERRED TO]
TARAK NATH GUPTA VS. STATE OF DELHI [LAWS(DLH)-2023-10-16] [REFERRED TO]
ABU THAHIR VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2022-11-9] [REFERRED TO]
MOHD. AZAM KHAN VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2023-7-63] [REFERRED TO]
POONAM MADHA PARMAR VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2022-7-1387] [REFERRED TO]
USHA DOGRA VS. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH [LAWS(HPH)-2024-5-109] [REFERRED TO]
SUNIL KUMAR GULATI VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2022-3-24] [REFERRED TO]
SUDARSHAN VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(KAR)-2020-8-76] [REFERRED TO]
MAHESH LAL N.Y. VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2021-11-109] [REFERRED TO]
SANJIV KUMAR VS. STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI [LAWS(DLH)-2023-12-27] [REFERRED TO]
SUNIL RAJAN K. VS. INSPECTOR OF POLICE [LAWS(KER)-2024-11-114] [REFERRED TO]
DAISY M.P. VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2020-3-67] [REFERRED TO]
RAVI PARKASH SHARMA VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2022-3-26] [REFERRED TO]
P.GOPALAKRISHNAN ALIAS DILEEP VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2022-1-232] [REFERRED TO]
SANIL NARAYANAN VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2021-10-5] [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. MOHAMMED IQBAL [LAWS(MAD)-2021-12-106] [REFERRED TO]
R. K. AKHANDE VS. SPECIAL POLICE ESTABLISHMENT, LOKAYUKT [LAWS(MPH)-2021-6-60] [REFERRED TO]
MANMOHAN SINGH VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(MPH)-2022-7-145] [REFERRED TO]
BRAHAMPAL SINGH RANA VS. STATE OF HARYANA [LAWS(P&H)-2022-4-129] [REFERRED TO]
SUNIL KUMAR GULATI VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2022-3-125] [REFERRED TO]
HALVI. K.S. VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(KER)-2021-9-234] [REFERRED TO]
MUNESH MEENA VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2020-6-117] [REFERRED TO]
JUDGEMENT
Ranjan Gogoi, C.J.I. -
(1.)Leave granted in Special Leave Petition (Criminal) Nos. 9671 of 2017, 1048 of 2018, 2225 of 2018 and 3272 of 2018.
(2.)Criminal Appeal No.2003 of 2012.
Facts:
On 7th December, 2009 the In-charge of the Electronics Cell of Sadar Bazar Police Station located in the district of Saharanpur of the State of Uttar Pradesh lodged a First Information Report ("FIR" for short) alleging that one Dhoom Singh in association with the appellant - Ritesh Sinha, was engaged in collection of monies from different people on the promise of jobs in the Police. Dhoom Singh was arrested and one mobile phone was seized from him. The Investigating Authority wanted to verify whether the recorded conversation in the mobile phone was between Dhoom Singh and the appellant - Ritesh Sinha. They, therefore, needed the voice sample of the appellant and accordingly filed an application before the learned jurisdictional Chief Judicial Magistrate ("CJM" for short) praying for summoning the appellant to the Court for recording his voice sample.
(3.)The learned CJM, Saharanpur by order dated 8th January, 2010 issued summons to the appellant to appear before the Investigating Officer and to give his voice sample. This order of the learned CJM was challenged before the High Court of Allahabad under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "Cr.P.C."). The High Court having negatived the challenge made by the appellant by its order dated 9th July, 2010, the present appeal has been filed.
(2.)Criminal Appeal No.2003 of 2012.
Facts:
On 7th December, 2009 the In-charge of the Electronics Cell of Sadar Bazar Police Station located in the district of Saharanpur of the State of Uttar Pradesh lodged a First Information Report ("FIR" for short) alleging that one Dhoom Singh in association with the appellant - Ritesh Sinha, was engaged in collection of monies from different people on the promise of jobs in the Police. Dhoom Singh was arrested and one mobile phone was seized from him. The Investigating Authority wanted to verify whether the recorded conversation in the mobile phone was between Dhoom Singh and the appellant - Ritesh Sinha. They, therefore, needed the voice sample of the appellant and accordingly filed an application before the learned jurisdictional Chief Judicial Magistrate ("CJM" for short) praying for summoning the appellant to the Court for recording his voice sample.
(3.)The learned CJM, Saharanpur by order dated 8th January, 2010 issued summons to the appellant to appear before the Investigating Officer and to give his voice sample. This order of the learned CJM was challenged before the High Court of Allahabad under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "Cr.P.C."). The High Court having negatived the challenge made by the appellant by its order dated 9th July, 2010, the present appeal has been filed.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.