V. B. GUPTA, J. ( 1 ) THE present petition has been filed under Article 227 of the constitution of India read with Section 482 Cr. P. C. for recalling of the order dated 27th January, 2007 and 2nd February, 2007 passed by Ms. Rina Singh Nag, learned Additional Sessions Judge. ( 2 ) LEARNED Additional Sessions Judge passed both the orders while dealing with the application for anticipatory bail filed on behalf of the petitioner in a case under Section 498-A/406 IPC read with Section 3/4 of Dowry prohibition act. The relevant portion of the impugned orders dated 27th january, 2007 and 2nd February, 2007 for the purpose of disposal of the present petition reads as under: "27th January, 2007 "settlement talks held in the chamber separately as well as jointly between the parties. Husband and wife are inclined to save their marriage but there are certain distress/mistrust factors between the couple so it would he appropriate that at the first instance, husband and wife appear before psychiatrist/psychologist on 3. 2. 2007 at 10. 30 am at IHBAS, Shahdara and IO SI j. P. Meena shall remain present there. If required conciliations on future dates, be also held at IHBAS in order to see the probability to save the marriage. One photocopy of medical treatment document of accused/husband for the year 1999 and 2005 which has been shown to the Court by the complainant reflects that accused/husband has been suffering from shizophrenia. Copy of the medical record has been furnished. Let one copy be retained in the court and one copy be given to the IO for verification from the concerned hospital as in that eventuality, if his disease is confirmed, in my considered view, accused/husband would be required to take continuous treatment. 2nd February, 2007. "as per the IO, the couple is to appear before Psychiatrist at IHBAS on 3. 2. 2007. IO had also visited Sir Ganga Ram Hospital to obtain the earlier treatment documents of the applicant, but he was told by the doctor that it was confidential record and he prays for summoning the doctor with relevant record. IO has submitted his report in this regard. Let the doctor concerned be summoned alongwith relevant record for 3. 3. 2007. IO had also visited Sir Ganga Ram Hospital to obtain the earlier treatment documents of the applicant, but he was told by the doctor that it was confidential record and he prays for summoning the doctor with relevant record. IO has submitted his report in this regard. Let the doctor concerned be summoned alongwith relevant record for 3. 3. 2007. The prayer in the present application is that since the applicant was taking treatment from Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, he should be allowed to go there only. There is no ground in the application. Both the parties are directed to comply with the last order dated 27. 1. 2007, which has been shown by the IO to the court. " ( 3 ) IT has been contended by Learned counsel for the petitioner that order dated 27th January, 2007 is hit by the provisions of Article 20 (3) of the constitution of India and he cannot be compelled to testify and create evidence against himself. However, the petitioner is willing to appear before the mediation Centre and petitioner is under regular treatment of Dr. V. Kumar, psychiatrist of Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, New Delhi and in case any medical investigation is required, the same can be done before that Doctor who has complete knowledge of medical history of the petitioner. ( 4 ) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner in support of her contentions has also cited two decisions of the Apex Court, State of Bombay vs. Kathi Kalu air 1961 Supreme Court 1808 and M. P. Sharma and Ors. vs. Satish Chandra AIR 1954 sc 300 . ( 5 ) ON the other hand, it has been contended by the learned counsel for the respondent that there is no illegality or infirmity in the orders passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge and the Judge was well within its ambit of power to pass the order and this order was passed only after the respondent brought this fact to the notice of the Court that the petitioner is suffering from acute form of Schizophrenia and this fact was suppressed by the petitioner before marriage. Moreover, this is important an fact for deciding the bail application of the petitioner and directing the petitioner to appear before the psychiatrist/psychologist, is a part of investigation and as such there is no illegality in the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge. Moreover, this is important an fact for deciding the bail application of the petitioner and directing the petitioner to appear before the psychiatrist/psychologist, is a part of investigation and as such there is no illegality in the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge. ( 6 ) AS per provisions of Clause (3) of Article 20 of the constitution of India, no person accused of any offence shall be compelled to be a witness against himself. Similarly, in the present case, petitioner cannot be forced to get himself examined from any psychiatrist or psychologist as directed by the Court. ( 7 ) SINCE petitioner is willing to appear before the Mediation centre, in these circumstances, the trial Court can consider this offer of the petitioner and can direct both the parties to appear before the Mediation centre. Furthermore, as petitioner is getting his medical treatment from Dr. V. Kumar of Sir Ganga Ram Hospital and is willing to undergo medical investigation to be conducted by that Doctor, the trial Court, if it may deem fit, can summon dr. V. Kumar of Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, New Delhi and also direct the petitioners to undergo medical investigation under supervision of Dr. V. Kumar. ( 8 ) WITH these observations, the present petition stands disposed of.