# Court are implemented in letter and spirit. We think it would suffice if we request the

- **Citation:** C.L.No.68/
- **Court:** Allahabad High Court
- **Decided:** 2008-05-19
- **Case number:** C.L.No.68/
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/court-are-implemented-in-letter-and-spirit-we-think-it-would-suffice-if-we-163547
- **Pages:** 8

## Text

324
―........We share the sympathetic concern of the learned counsel for the
petitioners that under-trials should not languish in jails for long spells merely on account
of their inability to meet monetary obligations. We are, however, of the view that such
monitoring can be done more effectively by the High Court since it would be easy for
that court to collect and collate the statistical information in that behalf, apply the broad
guidelines already issued and deal with the situation as it emerges from the status reports
presented to it. The role of the High Court is to ensure that the guidelines issued by this
Court are implemented in letter and spirit. We think it would suffice if we request the
Chief Justices of the High Courts to undertake a review of such cases in their States and
give appropriate directions where needed to ensure proper and effective implementation
of the guidelines. Instead of repeating the general directions already issued, it would be
sufficient to remind the High Courts to ensure expeditious disposal of cases. Withdrawal
of cases from time to time may not always be an appropriate and acceptable remedy, but
what is required is to evolve a mechanism, which would enable early disposal of cases.
The High court being on the spot would be able to diagnose the ailment rather than
merely deal with symptoms. We are, therefore, of the view that these petitions have
served their purposes and should stand disposed of leaving the further implementation to
the High Courts.‖
IN ADDITION, THIS COURT DOTH FURTHER ORDER that the ORDER
dated the 30th April, 1979 passed by this Court in the above said Petition granting bail
shall stand vacated subject to the Order quoted above:
IN ADDITION, THIS COURT DOTH LASTLY ORDER THAT THIS ORDER
be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned.
WITNESS the Hon'ble Shri Aziz Mushabbar Ahmadi, Chief Justice of India at
the Supreme court, New Delhi, dated this the 4th day of August, 1995.
(xxi)
Disposal of cases of under trials.
C.L.No.68/ VIIg-38: Admin (V) Dated: DEC: 10, 1996
Special secretary, State of U.P. has informed that large number of cases of undertrials is pending in the Subordinate Courts. The under-trials are languishing in jails for
want of disposal of their cases.
By enclosing a list of the under trials showing the period of their detention, I am
directed that the directions contained in circular Letter 59/VIIIg 38/ Admin ̳G' Dated
16.9.1981 be followed strictly.
I am, therefore, to request you that kindly make all out efforts in disposal of cases
of under trials prisoners confined in jails for over six months and report of the
compliance be sent to this Hon'ble court in each month.
(xxi-a) Trial of hardened criminals inside the jail premises.
C.L. No. 13/2008; Admin. (G): Dated May 19, 2008

In a reference having been made by a District and Sessions Judge to the Hon'ble
Court seeking permission for trial of the notorious hardened under trial prisoners inside
the jail precincts on request of the Senior Prosecuting Officer based on the direction of the
Senior Superintendent of Police and the District Magistrate, upon consideration, the
325
Hon'ble Court has resolved that a direction be issued to all the District and Sessions
Judges that on such request being received by them they are supposed to take decision in
their discretion in the matter in consonance with the provision made in Section 9(6) of the
Criminal Procedure Code as amended by U.P. Act 1 of 1984 which provides that where it
appears expedient to do so for consideration of internal security or public order, the Court
of Sessions may hold its sitting in a particular case at any place in the sessions division
without consent of the prosecution and the accused and only in case of their being not
convinced of there being any security threat involved, should they refer the matter to the
Hon'ble Court for consideration and decision.

Therefore, I am directed to request you to kindly make strict compliance of the
above directions of the Hon'ble Court and to bring the contents of this circular letter to all
the Judicial Officers working under your administrative control.
(xxii) Implementation of guidelines for expeditious disposal of pending cases of
under trial prisoners, as given in the order dated: 4.8.95 passed by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in writ petition (Criminal) No.222/1979 (Shri Rahim
Malla and others VS. The Home Secretary, Govt. of Jammu and Kashmir.
C.L.No. 9/ VIIb-287(PIL), Dated: Feb: 29, 1997
With reference to the court's circular letter no.44/VIIIv-287 (PIL), dated
9.11.1995, I am directed to send herewith a copy of order dated 4.98.1995 passed by the
Hon'ble supreme Court, on the above subject and to request you kindly to ensure the
compliance of the guidelines, given in the aforesaid order of the Hon'ble the Supreme
court strictly under intimation to the court.
(See for Judgment 1995 Cr. L.J.4020)
(xxiii) Disposal of the cases of under trials expeditiously
C.L.No.43 Dated: 30th September, 1997
It has come to the notice of the Hon'ble court that cases of under trials are not
transferred for disposal from the vacant court. The Hon'ble court has expressed its
concern on such situation.
Speedy trial is a right of the accused whether he be a suspect or under trial, he is
not denuded of his right to have expedient fair trial. It is an obligation of each court to
ensure that there is no infringement of the indefeasible rights of the accused on account
of delay in disposal of their cases. Social interest also lies in punishing the guilty and
exoneration on of the innocent, but this determination must be arrived with reasonable
disposal.
By enclosing the copy of the order of the Hon'ble court passed in bail Application
No. 6128/1997, I am Directed to request you that the said order be circulated amongst all
the district Judges and additional District Judges for guidance and strict compliance in
future.
I am, therefore, to request you that the direction of the Hon'ble court be complied.
326
C. L. No. 7/2007/Admin 'G': Dated: 20th February, 2007
The Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi has intimated to
the Court that the Parliamentary Committee on the Welfare of. Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes on the Ministry of Tribal Affairs, while considering the matter
pertaining to atrocities on Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and pattern of social
crimes towards them recommended as under:
―The Committee is aware that one of the terms of reference of the Malimath
Committee was to suggest a sound system of managing, on professional lines, the
pendency of cases at investigation and trial stages and making the police, the
Prosecution and the judiciary accountable for delays in their respective domains.
The Committee feels that the time taken in disposal of atrocity cases should be
considerably cut short. The Ministry of Law and Justice should look into this
matter and take necessary steps. The Committee hope that the Sessions Courts
notified as Special Courts would give up top priority to atrocity cases, which in
the opinion of the Committee will help in bringing the pendency down. "
Therefore, in this regard while enclosing herewith a copy of D.O. No.
11017/50/2001-JUS (M), dated December 22, 2006 of Sri Rajiv Agarwal, Additional
Secretary, Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi, I am directed to
request you to Impress upon the concerned Courts to ensure speedy trial of cases
pertaining to atrocities committed against Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, so as
to minimize the pendency of such cases.
C. L. No: 77/ 07/ Admin ̳G' Section Dated: Allahabad: 15.12.2007

The Hon'ble Apex Court during consideration of the matter involving illegal
detention of Michal Lalung for 54 years in Writ Petition (Criminal) No.296 0f 2005 and
News Item ―38 years in Jail without Trial‖ published in Hindustan Times dated
06.02.2006 in connected Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 18 of 2006 has been pleased to lay
down the following guidelines for trial of mentally ill under- trial prisoners lying since
long in various psychiatric hospitals/nursing homes:-
(i)
whenever a person of unsound mind is ordered to be detained in any
psychiatric hospital/nursing home under Section 330 (2) of the Code, the reports
contemplated under Section 39 shall be submitted to the concerned
Court/Magistrate periodically. The Court/Magistrate shall also call for such
reports if they are not received in time. When the reports are received, the
Court/Magistrate shall consider the reports and pass appropriate orders whenever
necessary. In regard to prisoners covered by sub section (1) of Section 30 of the
Prisoners Act, 1900, the procedure prescribed by sub sections (2) and (3) of that
Section read with Section 40 of the Mental Health Act, 1987 shall be followed.
(ii)
Wherever any under trial prisoner is in jail for more than the maximum
period of imprisonment prescribed for the offense for which he is charged (other
than those charged for offenses for which life imprisonment or death is the
punishment), the Magistrate/Court shall treat the case as closed and report the
matter to the medical officer in charge of the psychiatric hospital, so that the
327
Medical Officer in charge of the hospital can consider his discharge as per Section
40 of the Act.
(iii)
In cases where, the under trial prisoners (who are not being charged with
offense for which the punishment is imprisonment for life or death penalty), their
cases may be considered for release in accordance with sub section(1) of Section
330 of the Code, if they have completed five or more years as inpatients.
(iv)
As regards the under trial prisoners who have been charged with grave
offenses for which life imprisonment or death penalty is the punishment, such
persons shall be subjected to examination periodically as provided in sub section
(1), (3) and (4) of Section 39 of the Act and the officers named therein (visitors,
medical officer in charge of the hospital and the examining medical officer
respectively) should send the reports to the court as to whether the under trial
prisoner is fit enough to face the trial to defend the charge. The Sessions Courts
where the cases are pending should also seek periodic reports from such hospitals
and every such case shall be given a hearing at least once in three months. The
Sessions Judge shall commence the trial of such cases as such, as it is found that
such mentally ill person has been found fit to face trial.

Upon consideration of the above judgment, the Hon'ble Court has opined that it
behooves the subordinate judiciary to implement the directions of the Hon'ble Apex
Court given as above.
Therefore, while enclosing a copy of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court, I
am to request you to kindly bring the contents of this Circular Letter to the notice of all
the Judicial Officers under your administrative control and impress upon them to make
compliance of the directions contained therein in letter and spirit.
C. L. No.54/2007Admin (G): Dated: 13.12.2007

The Hon'ble Court has been pleased to express deep concern over the state of trial
of the under trial prisoners languishing in jail for a considerably long period of time,
sometimes even longer than the maximum period stipulated under law for which they
could be convicted.

Therefore, I am directed to say that
in continuation of a catena of Circular
Letters issued on the subject earlier by the
Hon'ble Court noted in the margin, the
priority should be given to the trial of the
cases of such under trial prisoners of the
above category.

 I am, further to request you to kindly bring the contents of this Circular Letter to
all the Judicial Officers working under your administrative control for strict compliance.
1. C.L.No. 114/VIIb-3 dated 05.09.1975.
2. C.L.No.28 /VIIIh-13 dated 07.03.1979.
3.C.L.No. 90/VIIIg-38 Admin.(G) dated 01.12.1980.
4.C.L.NO. 59/VIIIg-38Admin.(G) dated 16.09.1981.
5.C.L.No.18/VIII-b-Admin.(G) dated 19/21.04.2000.
328
Guidelines laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of trial of under trial
prisoners languishing in prison since long in Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 296 of
2005 and the connected Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 18 of 2006
C.L. No. 28 Admin ̳G' Section Dated: Allahabad: 19.12.2008
In continuation of Court's earlier Circular Letter no. 77 Admin G Section dated
15.12.2007 on the above subject, I am directed to say that the Hon'ble Apex Court has
been pleased to pass following order on 03.09.2008 in Writ Petition Criminal No. 296 of
2005 and the connected Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 18 of 2006:-
―Order passed by this Court on 24th October 2007, be reported and
circulated.
There are large numbers of under trial prisoners who are mentally ill and
thus unable to face trial. This Court has passed an order on 24.10.2007 and issued
directions to see that the trial of these under trial prisoners be expedited or to see
whether they could be released from the Jail or from Mental Hospital as per Law.
The District Judges of each District of the States will monitor these pending cases
and give a report every six months to the respective High Courts and the High
Courts may issue appropriate directions to protect the rights of these under trial
prisoners.
The Writ Petitions are disposed of accordingly.‖
Upon consideration of the matter, the Hon'ble Court has desired that (i) the trial
of these under trial prisoners be expedited and their release be considered from Jails or
Mental Hospitals as per Law (ii) the District Judge shall monitor all the pending cases of
such under trial prisoners who are mentally ill and thus are unable to face trial and submit
a report after every six months to this Hon'ble Court.
 I am, therefore, to request you to kindly bring the contents of the circular letter to
the notice of all the Judicial Officers under your Administrative Control and impress
upon them to make compliance of the directions in right earnest. Further action taken
report and six monthly reports as directed by the Hon'ble Apex Court be regularly sent.
(xxiv) To decide suites Criminal Trials Labour Disputes, Rent Control Cases &
other cases on basis of a time bound programmed fixed by the court
C.L.No.46/ dated: 15th October, 1997
While enclosing herewith a copy of the judgment and order dated 24.9.1997
passed by the division bench of Hon'ble Mr. Justice R.R.K. Trivedi and Hon'ble Mr.
Justice M.Katju in civil Misc. writ Petition No.30219 of 1997 Ayodhya Sahai alias
Kunwar Bahadur Vs District Judge, Jaunpur and another and I am directed to say that the
court has issued general mandamus to decide suits, criminal trials, labour disputes, rent
control cases and other cases on basis of a time bound programme fixed by the court for
each case usually by day to day hearing. This exercise must start from the next date after
the receipt of this Judgment
I am further directed to emphasize that if any suit, criminal trial and other the
cases take more than two years to decide from the date of institution or an appeal take
more than one year an adverse entry shall be placed on the record of the judicial officer
329
responsible for the delay by the district Judge of the district and if the officer himself is
the district Judge an adverse entry shall be placed in his record by the Hon'ble Inspecting
Judge of the District. It may also amount the judicial misconduct of the concerning
judicial officer who are responsible for the delay in deciding the cases.
I am, therefore, to request you kindly to provide a copy of the aforesaid order to
all the Presiding Officers working under you for strict compliance and ensure that
directions contained in the said order are being carried out strictly.
I am, further, to add that a copy of aforesaid order may also be made available to
all the Bar Associations in the district, the D.G.C. (Criminal), D.G.C. (Civil), D.G.C.
(Revenue) and other counsel representing the State and local bodies or local authorities in
your district for information.

(See for Judgment: 1997 AWC (supp.) 525)
(xxv) Resorting provisions of the code in the matters where accused are
absconding.
C.L.No.24/viIb-65/Admn. (G) Dated: 16th June, 2000
The delay in the disposal of criminal cases at the trial stage is not only against the
principal of the law but it also does a great injustice both to the victim and the society as
also to the assailant. Although human memory is sharp but with the passage of time much
of evidence is lost as apparently many influences are at work. The criminal remains
absent from court proceedings and the courts are not resorting to the provisions as
contained in the code (Section 299) which in fact gives encouragement to the criminal.
That s how the delay in the disposal of criminal cases becomes in a way the negative
contribution to the Judicial system. It has come to the notice of the Hon'ble Court that
almost in each district a large number of cases are awaiting trial on account of
nonappearance of the accused despite several steps for procuring the attendance of the
accused have been taken. Justice suffers, and so does the society. To overcome such a
situation the provisions of section 299 of code should be resorted expeditiously which
would in give relief to over burdened court dockets.
I am, therefore to bring to your notice that the matters of the absenting accused
be taken up on priority basis and every quarterly the position of such be brought in to the
notice of Hon'ble Court.
(xxvi) Court Management for expeditious disposal of cases by Subordinate courts.
C.L.No.27 admin A/DR (S) Dated: June 21, 2000.
It has been observed by the Hon'ble court that in the event of a Presiding
Officer being transferred from a district in midterm and being not replaced by an officer
of comparable seniority at that level, the working of the courts is substantially disturbed
as the shifting in offices takes places on seniority basis. It then creates a situation in
which the officer move up in the numbered hierarchy leaving many, if not all, of their
cases behind. They inherit the caseload of the numbered position into which they move.
The same situation arises every June when in the normal course Presiding Officer receive
order of their transfer. Besides disrupting many of the cases pending in these courts, such
a practice does little to promote an interest in the efficient disposal of cases and
330
commitment to a particular caseload. The realization that without the foreseeable future
most or all of their cases be left behind encourages a wait-and-so attitude.

Hon'ble court with a view to effectively manage the court dockets and as ensuring
expeditious disposal of cases have pleased to give following directions:-
1.
All Sessions trials which are not part heard on tied-up to any Session
judge or Special Judge or designated court shall be so allocated as to
enable the senior most amongst the Session Judges to begin with the latest
committal proceedings. the rest in seniority to deal with the session cases
of a year before and so on and each one them will fix dates and
rescheduling of the calendar/cause-list maintained by them may be done as
necessary. Sessions Trial shall be fixed on day to- day basis as far as
possible.
2.
All the cases which are pending where no officers have yet been posted
should be transferred to the courts which are functioning and a criteria be
fixed that the entire list of pending cases in the absent a court be divided
half and half on year wise basis and the latter half dealing with old cases
should first be transferred within 15 days and the other half may be
retained in those courts for a period of three months in the hope of courts
being manned by the officers within that period. If no posting takes place
then those cases shall also stand transferred in the like manner as the latter
set of cases.
3.
On a transfer to a court on its vacancy, the officer may be posted in that
court without indicating his nomenclature and affecting his seniority. Such
officer is to continue in the same court till he is transferred to some other
district or he is posted to the parent (instituting) court such as the Court of
J.S.C.C., Chief Judicial Magistrate, Civil Judge (Senior Division) Civil
Judge (Junior Division). Special Courts under Special Acts or for some
administrative reasons he is transferred to some other post or place.
4.
The Posting & transfer will not affect his enter seniority vis-à-vis local
officers irrespective of the Court where he may be posted for the purposed
functioning.
5.
The officer in the district court shall be assigned the work according to the
court number though for administrative purposes for maintaining seniority
a different list may be prepared.
6.
In the district court, every courtroom will be serially numbered excepting
the court of District Judge and the officers will be posted as presiding
officer of a particular court irrespective of their seniority in the district.
However, in posting the officers in parent (Instituting) of special courts it
may not be necessary to post the officer with reference to court numbers
and they shall be posted by the designation.
7.
The District Judge in his discretion on certain contingencies may change
the place of sitting of a Presiding Officer of the court and give number of
such court according e.g. if a senior officer is posted as court no.16 while
331
a junior officer is posted as court no.1in a most spacious court room the
senior officer may be assigned court room no.1 renumbering the court
No.1 as court no.16 and vice versa.
I am, therefore, to request you kindly to ensure compliance of the above
directions of the Court and it be brought to the notice of all the Presiding officers posted
in the judgeship for their information.
I am, further to request you that the arrangement so made compliance of the
directions aforesaid be intimated to the court.
(xxvii) Expediting the old cases of ̳Older Persons'.
C.L.No.30 dated: 10th July, 2000
 In the chief Justice conference held in the year 1999 it was resolved that the High
court shall vigorously pursue for quicker disposal of cases of persons aged above 65
years as far as practicable on priority basis. Government of India have also adopted
―National Policy for Older Persons because the India has Largest population of older
persons in the world. At present, large number of older persons is passing through an era
of difficulties and hardships because the family, which used to traditionally look after
them, is no longer being able to do so. There is high incidence of litigation concerning
property and inheritance, two of the most common issue in which elderly persons who
are generally involved. There are some older persons who are facing criminal charges
and are languishing in jails as under-trial persons. The elderly people deserve to be
attended by the legal system somewhat on priority basis. There is no built-in provision in
the judicial system to ensure speedy or time bound disposal of cases. Many of the cases
take years to conclude and may extend beyond the lifetime of orderly persons.
I am, directed to request you that the precedence should be given for hearing and
final disposal of those cases wherein one of the parties is passed the age of 65 years, as a
time bound project and to clear the docket of such cases by 31.12.2000.
(xxviii)To ensure effective management of court docket in the light of certain
circular letters issued by the court recently.
C.L.No.46 /Admin G. dated: October 20, 2000
Kindly take reference of the marginally noted court's circular letters in regard to
bring effective management of the court dockets and for ensuring expeditious disposal
of cases, certain directions were issued by the court through the above noted circular
letters.
C.L.No. 24 dated 16.6.2000
C.L.No.25 dated 16.6.2000
C.L.No. 26 dated 18.6.2000
C.L.No. 27 dated 21.6.2000
C.L.No. 28 dated 5.7.2000
C.L.No.29 dated 6/10.07.2000
C.L.No.30 dated 10.7.2000.
A progress report regarding speedy disposal of cases as
directed in the above-mentioned court's circular letter is
needed.
I am, therefore directed to request you kindly to submit
progress report in the matter to the court latest by 1st week of
November, 2000.