The Himachal Pradesh High Court has rejected a plea challenging the order issued on January 6, 2023, by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (ACJM). This order granted permission, in response to a police application, to obtain the voice samples of the petitioner and other parties involved. The court reasoned that the authority to obtain voice samples is granted for the purpose of a thorough investigation, and it is not limited to the accused alone but extends to any person involved in the case.

The case originated from an FIR filed on May 14, 2022, by Sumitra Chauhan, accusing the petitioner and others of offenses under Sections 323, 342, and 382 of the IPC. The petitioner's mother, Smt. Usha Thakur, had reported a quarrel in Village Sandoh/Bishidi, leading to the police registering a case under different sections of the IPC.

During the investigation, it was discovered that the petitioner had communicated with the accused, prompting the police to seek permission to obtain voice samples from both the petitioner and other relevant individuals. The petitioner challenged this order, contending that as a non-accused individual, he should not be subjected to voice sampling.

The petitioner's counsel argued that the ACJM had erred in allowing the police to obtain the voice sample, emphasizing that the petitioner was not an accused party. The counsel requested the court to set aside the ACJM's order. On the contrary, the respondent's counsel argued that there are no restrictions on the magistrate's authority to direct any person, including the petitioner, to provide a voice sample.

The court, in its ruling, emphasized that a Judicial Magistrate possesses the authority to order any person, not just the accused, to provide a voice sample for the purpose of a thorough investigation. The court rejected the notion that this authority is confined to the accused alone. It affirmed that the power to obtain a voice sample is crucial for proper case investigation, emphasizing its necessity for identifying individuals involved. As a result, the petition was dismissed by the Himachal Pradesh High Court.

Case: Nimesh v State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors.

Cr. MMO No. 129 of 2023.