# in First Appeal No. 271 of 2005- Moti Lal vs. Bhagwan Das

- **Citation:** C.L. No. 24 /2005
- **Court:** Allahabad High Court
- **Decided:** 2005-08-08
- **Case number:** C.L. No. 24 /2005
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/in-first-appeal-no-271-of-2005-moti-lal-vs-bhagwan-das-163634
- **Pages:** 1

## Text

370
(xxvi) Circulation of copy of the Judgment and order passed by the Hon'ble court
in First Appeal No. 271 of 2005- Moti Lal vs. Bhagwan Das.
C.L. No. 24 /2005 Dated 8th August, 2005
I am directed to send herewith a copy of Judgment and Order dated 4.3.2005
passed by Hon'ble Court (Hon'ble Sushil Harkauli, J. and Hon'ble G.P. Srivastava, J.) in
First Appeal no. 271 of 2005- Moti Lal vs. Bhagwan Das for information and strict
compliance.
I am further to add that the directions given by the Hon'ble Court in aforesaid
Judgment and Order may Kindly be brought to the notice of all the Judicial Officers in
the Judgeship under your administrative control for their information and guidance
faithfully and punctually.
(See for Judgment 2005 (60) ALR7)
C.L. No. 50/2006: Dated 15th November, 2006

In Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.12873 of 2005 - Ramesh and another v. State
of U.P. & others, the Hon'ble High Court has observed that the staff of the subordinate
court do not communicate the orders passed by Hon'ble Court in time and as such this
type of careless activity malign the image of judiciary, if not properly followed in true
perspective.

While enclosing herewith a copy of the order dated 15.09.2006 passed in
Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 12873 of 2005 - Ramesh and another v. State of U.P.
and others aforesaid, I am directed to request you to kindly direct all officers working
under your supervisory control to be more careful about their staff in respect of
communication of the order of the High Court to uphold the majesty.

Kindly ensure strict compliance of the directions above.
(xxvii) Endorsement regarding age of he accused when he mention his age at the
time of his examination under Section 313 Cr. P.C.
C.L. No. 5/2006 Admin ̳G' Dated: 15th February, 2006
While taking orientation and inviting attention to court's Circular Letter Nos. 69
dated 13.8.1968, 117/VIIc-34 dated 5.8.1974, 89 /Admin. ̳A' dated 3.5.1977, 71/VIIc-34
/Adm. ̳G' dated 7.11.1981 and 33/ Admin, ̳G' /VII-f-45 dated 13.5.1986. I am desired
to say that the Hon'ble Court (coram Hon'ble Mr. Justice Imtiyaz Murtaza and Hon'ble
Mr. Justice Amar Saran) in Cri. Jail appeal No.58 of 2001- Kaloo Vs. State of U.P.
2006(54) ACC 343 has been pleased to ―direct all the Sessions Judges and Magistrates in
the State of U.P. to make a positive endorsement as to their own estimate of the age of the
accused when the accused mention their ages at the time of their examination under
Section 313 Cr. P.C. This endorsement must be made in each and every case even if the
Court concerned is in agreement with the age as mentioned by the accused. This direction
has become necessary because we are finding that the requirement in Rule 50 of the
General Rules (Criminal) that the court must not down its own estimate of age in case it
is not in agreement with the age mentioned by the accused are more often than not being
overlooked by trial courts. Only if the Court is required to record a positive finding about
the age of the accused in each trial after looking to the age mentioned by the accused in