Case Note & Summary
The appeal was filed against a judgment dated 04.06.2018, which dismissed an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) for quashing an order dated 22.01.2016 by the Additional Junior Civil Judge, Bapatla. The case arose from a First Information Report (FIR) filed on 06.01.2016 by Respondent No.2, alleging that the appellant obtained a fake Scheduled Caste certificate claiming to belong to the 'Yanadi' caste while actually being of the 'Telanga' caste. The appellant, originally named 'Immadabathina Veeranjaneyulu', had changed his name to 'Kathi David Raju' and was employed as an Additional Assistant Engineer. The FIR also implicated the appellant's children in obtaining fake caste certificates. Following the FIR, the appellant was arrested on 11.01.2016, and a request for a DNA test was made on 13.01.2016, which was subsequently ordered by the Additional Junior Civil Judge. The appellant challenged this order, arguing that it was based on insufficient grounds and that the investigation was incomplete. The respondent's counsel contended that the DNA test was necessary to establish the appellant's lineage. The Supreme Court analyzed the case, noting that the police had not conducted a substantial investigation before requesting the DNA test. The Court held that the order for the DNA test was premature and unsustainable, allowing the appeal and setting aside the High Court's judgment and the Additional Junior Civil Judge's order. The Court permitted the concerned court to reconsider the request for a DNA test if sufficient materials were presented (Paras 1-5).
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Inherent Jurisdiction - Quashing of Order - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Section 482 - The Supreme Court found that the Additional Junior Civil Judge's order for a DNA test was unsustainable due to lack of substantial investigation and material evidence. The High Court erred in not exercising its inherent jurisdiction to set aside the order, which was based on insufficient grounds. Held that the request for a DNA test should be reconsidered only if sufficient materials are presented (Paras 4-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the order for conducting a DNA test was justified given the circumstances of the case.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed 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, allowing for reconsideration of the DNA test request if sufficient materials are presented.
Law Points
- Inherent jurisdiction
- DNA test
- Section 482 Cr.P.C.
- false caste certificate
- police investigation
- Section 53 Cr.P.C.
