# be split into two for use in respect of different prisoners

- **Citation:** C.L. No. 58/VIIIa-50/Admn
- **Court:** Allahabad High Court
- **Decided:** 1992-11-23
- **Case number:** C.L. No. 58/VIIIa-50/Admn
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/be-split-into-two-for-use-in-respect-of-different-prisoners-163317
- **Pages:** 2

## Text

225

All concerned Presiding Officers are directed to comply strictly with the contents
of the Prescribed Form No. 47. The Form should be used in its entirety, and it should not
be split into two for use in respect of different prisoners.
To observe the mandate in Section 309(2) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
C.L. No. 58/VIIIa-50/Admn. 'G' dated November 23, 1992
I am directed to enclose herewith a copy of the Order dated 28.9.1992 of this
High Court passed in Habeas Corpus Writ Petition No.24268 of 1991 inviting the
attention preferably to paragraph nos. 67 and 68 of the order* dated 28.8.1992 and to
request you kindly to circulate the court's order to the concerned courts and they shall be
specifically told to scrupulously observe the mandate provided in Section 309(2) Cr.P.C.
and to ensure that remand is granted for a specific period coinciding with the adjourned
date of hearing, and either a printed form of warrant be used or in case it is not available,
the typed or cyclostyled copy be used in the exact reproduction of the same in both sides.
I am, therefore, to request you kindly to bring the contents of the letter in the notice
of all the concerned judicial officers for their information and strict compliance. Mohd.
Daud @ Mohd. Saleem v. Superintendent of District Jail Moradabad, 1993 All. LJ 430
(All) (DB).
Extracts of the Judgment
1.
A production warrant issued under S.267 does not constitute a detention order
authorising detention in prison of a person. The head note as well as the
phraseology of the said section indicates that the order envisaged therein is an
order to produce a person confined or detained in a prison before a criminal court
for answering to a charge or for the purpose of any proceedings against him. An
order under this section does not partake the character of a detention order by the
Court seeking production qua the charge of the proceedings pending before it.
2.
Section 309 of the Cr. P .C. does not envisage or permit remand to custody for an
indefinite period. The remand there under has to coincide with the duration of
adjournment and not beyond it.
3.
The Court is required to record its reasons for postponement or adjournment of
the trial, and not for remanding the accused. It is because a remand under Section
309, Cr .P .C. stands on a quite different footing than one under S.167 of the
Cr.P.C. where remand is sought pending investigation and the Magistrate or
Judge is required to apply its judicial mind to consider whether on the materials
collected, remand is necessary and justified.
4.
An invalid initial order of remand of custody can be rectified by subsequent
orders. The word "custody" in S.309 embraces both legal as well as illegal
custody.
5.
Sections 267 and 270 of the Cr .P .C. read together thus contain a clear legislative
mandate that when a prisoner already confined in a prison is produced before
another criminal court for answering to a charge of an offence and is detained in
or near such court for the purpose, on the court dispensing with his further
226
attendance, has to be conveyed back to the prison from where he has been
brought for such attendance.
6.
What S.354 (1) (d) of the Cr. P .C. means by the requirement of the judgment
containing a direction that the accused be set at liberty, is liberty with reference to
the case in which acquittal is recorded and not with reference to any other
confinement or custody.
(i)
Order sheet of the cases to reflect the dates of the remand of the accused on
jail custody (under section 309 Cr.P.C.)
C.L.No. 53/2000 Dated, December 6, 2000
Hon'ble court in Habeas Corpus writ petition No. 236 of 1992, connected with
Habeas Corpus writ petition Nos.237, 238 239 of 1992, 33 of 1993 and 8711 of 1989
(copy enclosed) deprecated about the non-maintenance of the order sheet as well as the
record of the case as per the instructions issued by the court time to time in this regard.
From the record at occasions it was noticed that there was no reference as to how long
the under trial had suffered incarceration and continued to be remanded in judicial
custody.
I am, therefore, to request you to kindly ensure the compliance of Hon'ble court's
directions contained in the aforesaid writ petition
2.
BAIL
(i)
Entertainment and disposal of bail application etc.
C.L. No. 24/VII-b-47 dated 25th February, 1976
All miscellaneous application both civil and criminal shall ordinarily be taken up
by the courts and disposed of between 10.30 and 11.30 a.m. and copies of the orders
passed be delivered to the parties latest within 24 hours. Bail applications in pending
cases, whether pending in courts or under investigation, shall also be taken up by
Sessions Judges ordinarily between 10.30 and 11.30 a.m. The copies of the bail orders
must invariably be dispatched to the courts of Magistrates latest by 2 p.m., and no bail
application should ordinarily be entertained by them beyond 11.30 a.m. In appellate
jurisdiction and in cases of bailable offences bail applications may be entertained even
after the lunch break or at any time convenient to the court and copies delivered with
greatest possible dispatch. The Chief Judicial Magistrates and Magistrates shall continue
to abide by the directions contained in C.L. No. 78, dated 21st may, 1971.
C.L. No. 93/VIIb-47 dated 22nd July, 1975

Regarding entertainment and disposal of bail applications and verification of
surety bonds in connection with such applications, the following instructions are
prescribed:-
1.
Bail applications may be disposed of after giving an opportunity to the parties
for arguments in case they are present.
2.
In case any Public Prosecutor does not submit his report or appear personally
to oppose the bail application, the Magistrates, unless for reasons to be
recorded he grants time, shall dispose of the applications.