# arrived at nor any offence compounded by any authority without prior leave of this

- **Citation:** C.L. No. 23/IXf-69/Admn
- **Court:** Allahabad High Court
- **Decided:** 1992-04-02
- **Case number:** C.L. No. 23/IXf-69/Admn
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/arrived-at-nor-any-offence-compounded-by-any-authority-without-prior-leave-of-163655
- **Pages:** 3

## Text

395
reasonably come to such conclusion. No such report having been submitted by the CBI
or any other agency till now in this Court, action on such a report by this Court would be
considered, if and when that occasion arises. We also direct that no settlement should be
arrived at nor any offence compounded by any authority without prior leave of this
Court.

We may add that on account of the great public interest involved in this matter,
the CBI and other Government agencies must expedite their action to complete the task
and prevent pendency of this matter beyond the period necessary. It is needless to
observe that the results achieved so far do not match the available time and opportunity
for a full investigation ever since the matter came to light. It is of utmost national
significance that no further time is lost in completion of the task.
(iii)
Implementation or directions of Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 29.8.1990 in
Criminal Appeal No.386 of 1978 Kishore Chandra v. State of Himachal
Pradesh
C.L. No. 23/IXf-69/Admn. (G) dated April 2, 1992
I am directed to send herewith a copy of the Government letter No. D 372/VIINyaya-3-1899/90, dated January 31, 1992 containing an extract of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court's judgment, dated August 29, 1990, on the above noted subject and to request you
kindly to circulate a copy of this letter with enclosures to all the Judicial Officers under
your supervision, the Bar Associations at Headquarters and at Tehsil levels, for their
information and necessary action.
In this case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has made the following observations:-
Before parting with the case, it is necessary to state that from the facts and
circumstances of this case it would appear that the investigating officer has taken the
appellant, a peon, the driver and the cleaner for ride and trampled upon their fundamental
personal liberty and lugged them in the capital offence punishable under Section 302,
I.P.C. by freely fabricating evidence against the innocent. Undoubtedly, heinous crimes
are committed under great secrecy and that investigation of a crime is a difficult and
tedious task. At the same time, the liberty of a citizen is a precious one guaranteed by
Art. 3 of Universal Declaration of Human Rights and also Art. 21 of the Constitution of
India and its deprivation shall be only in accordance with law. The accused has the
fundamental right to defend himself under Art. 10 of Universal Declaration of Human
Rights. The right to defence includes right to effective and meaningful defence at the
trial. The poor accused cannot defend effectively and adequately. Assigning an
experienced defence counsel to an indigent accused is a facet of fair procedure and an
inbuilt right to liberty and life envisaged under Arts. 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution.
Weaker the person accused of an offence, greater the caution and higher the
responsibility of the law enforcement agencies. Before accusing an innocent person of
the commission of a grave crime like the one punishable under Section 302, I.P.C., an
honest, sincere and dispassionate investigation has to be made and to feel sure that the

 For perusal of Judgment see Kishore Chandra v. State of Himachal Pradesh (1991) 1 SCC 286:1991 SCC
(Cri) 172 : AIR 1990 SC 2140: 1990 Cr.L.J.2289 (SC).
396
person suspected of the crime alone was responsible to commit the offence. Indulging in
free fabrication of the record is a deplorable conduct on the part of an investigating
officer, which undermines the public confidence reposed in the investigating agency.
Therefore, greater care and circumspection are needed by the investigating agency in this
regard. It is time that the investigating agencies evolve new and scientific investigating
methods, taking aid of rapid scientific development in the field of investigation. It is also
the duty of the State, i.e. Central or State Governments to organize periodical refresher
courses for the investigating officers to keep them abreast of the latest scientific
development in the art of investigation and the march of law so that the real offender
would be brought to book and the innocent would not be exposed to prosecution.
Though Art. 39A of the Constitution provides fundamental rights to equal justice
and free legal aid and though the State provides amicus curiae to defend the indigent
accused, he would be meted out with unequal defence if, as is common knowledge the
youngster from the Bar who has either a little experience or no experience is assigned to
defend him. It is high time that senior counsel practicing in the court concerned,
volunteer to defend such indigent accused as a part of their professional duty. If these
remedial steps are taken and an honest and objective investigation is done, it will
enhance a sense of confidence of the public in the investigating agency.
We fervently hope and trust that concerned authorities and Senior Advocates
would take appropriate steps in this regard.
C. L. No. -21/12006 : Dated: 29 May, 2006
I am directed to invite the attention of all the Judicial Officers towards order
passed by Hon'ble Court in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 2173 of 2006-Nardev @
Tomy & Ors. vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
In which Hon'ble Court has observed that the Magistrates are not careful at the
time of passing orders under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. while they ought to be careful in
scrutinizing individual cases as also the orders should not be passed on routine basis.
Therefore, while enclosing herewith a copy of judgment and order dated
22.2.2006 passed by Hon'ble Court in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.2173 of 2006 -
Nardev alias Tomy and others Vs. State of U.P. and others, I am to request you to kindly
circulate the copy of the judgment to all the Magistrate under your supervision and
control in judgeship for their guidance and strict compliance.
C. L. No. 51/2006: Dated: 15.11.2006.
The Hon'ble Court while passing judgment /order In criminal Misc. application
No. 6152 of 2006 -Smt. Masuman Vs. State of U.P. and others has expressed deep
397
anguish over non-observance of the provisions under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C in its true
spirit by the Judicial Officers, which in the Court's observation has made the provIsion of
156(3) of the Code otiose.
Therefore In continuation of the Court's earlier Circular letter no.21 of 2006 dated
291t1 May I 2006 , I have been directed to send herewith a copy of the judgement and
order dated 25.09.06 passed by the Hon'ble Court in above criminal misc. application
6152 of 2006- Smt. Masuman Vs. State of U.P. and others connected with various other
Criminal misc. applications with the request to kindly ensure that the provisions as
contained In Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C are strictly followed by the Judicial Officers in the
Judgeship under your supervision and control while providing them with a copy of the
Judgement and order aforesaid for their intimation, guidance & compliance.
(iv) Guidelines regarding application of provisions as contained in Section 156(3)
Cr.P.C.
C.L. No. 5/08/Admin ̳G' Section Dated: Allahabad: 21.01.2008
I am directed to say on the above subject that the Hon'ble Court has been pleased
to withdraw the Court's Circular Letter No. 51 of 2006 Dated 15.11.2006 issued as a
guideline for application of the provisions as contained in Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C.
Therefore you are requested to kindly bring this fact to the knowledge of all the
Judicial Officers working under your administrate control for information.
65.
JURISDICTION
(i)
Special Courts under The Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989
C.E. No.77 Main B-Admn. (D) dated July 30, 1990
In pursuance of the provisions of Clause (3) of Article 348 of the Constitution, the
Governor is please to order the publication of the following English translation of
Notification No. 44/VII.A.N.124/89, dated January 30, for general information.
 Notification/Misc. No. 44/VII-A.N. 124/89 dated January 30, 1990.
In exercise of the powers under Section 14 of the Scheduled Castes and the
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Act No.33 of 1989), the
Governor, with the concurrence of the Chief Justice of High Court of Judicature at
Allahabad is pleased to specify the District and Sessions Judges of Pauri Garhwal,
Chamoli, Tehri Garhwal, Uttarkashi, Almora and Pithoragarh and the second Additional
District and Sessions Judges of other districts of Uttar Pradesh to be the Special Courts of
their respective districts try the offences under the said Act.
(ii)
Withdrawal of the powers of Assistant Sessions Judge, earlier conferred on
Court of Small Causes, Civil Judges and Additional Civil Judges, and of
recess facility to them.
C. L. No. 50/IV-g-27; dated May 21, 1994
I am directed to say that Court's Circular Letter No. 26/IV-28, dated March 23,
1949 by which the Judges of the Court of Small Causes, Civil Judges and Additional
Civil Judges were appointed as Ex-officio Assistant Sessions Judges, was reconsidered