T.P.S.MANN,J - (1.) THE petitioner is seeking quashing of order passed by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Jagraon on 13.3.2006, whereby application moved by the prosecution for directing the petitioner for medical examination to supply his samples for DNA test, was accepted by directing him to make up his mind as to whether he wants to undergo medical examination for conducting DNA test.
(2.) AS per the petitioner, he along with Baldev Singh and Jasbir Singh was arrested in FIR No. 72 dated 28.5.1997 registered at the instance of Harbans Singh, brother of deceased Jaswant Singh. They were then sent up for trial but acquitted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana. In January, 2002, the matter was re-investigated on the request submitted by Pritam Singh, father of deceased Jaswant Singh. It was alleged that the petitioner was having illicit relations with the wife of deceased Jaswant Singh and when he was in England, he conspired with her to kill Jaswant Singh for which purpose he came to India and managed to get Jaswant Singh murdered through some persons. It is further alleged that in September 2005, the petitioner travelled to India as his father had passed away, however, was arrested at the Air Port by the police. He was shown to be arrested on September 20, 2005 and produced before the Court. After the conclusion of the investigation, challan was presented in the Court on 17.12.2005. On 22.12.2005, the Investigating Officer moved an application under Section 53 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') that as there were allegations that the petitioner was having illicit relations with the wife of the deceased, who had given birth to one son, namely, Manpreet Singh on 23.4.2993, DNA test was required to be conducted so as to ascertain the parentage of Manpreet Singh and, accordingly, a request was made that the petitioner be asked to supply his samples for DNA test so that the same may be sent to U.K. authorities for conducting the said test. The petitioner opposed the same by filing reply dated 4.1.2006. After hearing the arguments, Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Jagraon passed the impugned order, as mentioned above.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the impugned order passed by learned Judicial Magistrate was patently wrong and illegal as the challan had already been presented in the Court and the copies supplied to the accused and therefore, the case was required to be committed to the Court of Sessions, the offence being triable exclusively by the said Court. The Judicial Magistrate had no role to play other than committing the case. He could not make any enquiry in the case as it was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions. In fact, the proceedings before the Judicial Magistrate were merely formal in nature. Reliance was placed upon Raj Kishore Prasad v. State of Bihar and another, 1996(2) RCR(Crl.) 804 (SC) : 1996(4) Supreme Court Cases 495.;