M. P. SHARMA AND OTHERS vs SATISH CHANDRA, DISTRICT MAGISTRATE,DELHI, AND OTHERS.

The Supreme Court held that the provision for search warrants under Section 96(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure does not violate Article 19(1)(f) of the Constitution, as search and seizure is a temporary interference with property rights. It clarified that compelled production of incriminating documents constitutes testimonial compulsion under Article 20(3), but search and seizure under Sections 94 and 96 do not amount to compelled production. The Court emphasized the state's overriding power for social security protection, which is regulated by law and not subject to constitutional limitations regarding privacy.