# Payment of fee to a Medical Officer of Government

- **Citation:** C.L.No.26/71
- **Court:** Allahabad High Court
- **Decided:** 1931-06-29
- **Case number:** C.L.No.26/71
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/payment-of-fee-to-a-medical-officer-of-government-163887
- **Pages:** 2

## Text

467
 Payment of fee to a Medical Officer of Government
G.L.No.18/46-75(a) dated 29th June, 1931 read with
G.O.No.93/V-339 dated 16th January, 1931

When the State requires either a medical examination or technical evidence of a
medical nature, whether for the prosecution or the defence in a criminal case, it is the
duty of medical officers of Government to carry out the examination or to give the
evidence needed without remuneration. Similarly, fees cannot be claimed by medical
officers when a person is sent to them for examination in order to ascertain his age or to
find out whether his injuries are simple or grievous and so determined whether a case is
cognizable or non -cognizable or for some other similar purpose. When a court or a
police officer, sends a person for examination by a medical officer, he should at the same
time clearly explain the object of such examination unless special reason exist rendering
this undesirable.

When private persons, for their own purpose wish to have a medical examination
performed or medical evidence given on their behalf, the medical officer concerned is
entitled to his fees.
Fees for audit of accounts of Official Receivers
G.L.No.14/1671-(14) dated 9th May, 1941

All insolvency Judges should see that payment of audit fee at the sanctioned rates
is duly provided for in the case of all insolvent estates the account of which are still
running.
Fees payable to Registered Accountants
G.L.No.38/180-33(2) dated 5th December, 1941 read with
G.O.No.1986/VIII-531-1941 dated 10th November, 1941

It is suggested that for expert evidence by registered accountants payment should
be made on a scale of fees ranging between Rs. 50 and Rs.150, according to the
professional standing of the witness for each day spent in attendance or travelling.
Payment of fee to State Counsel
C.L.No.26/71 dated 10th February, 1971

For awarding fee to the State Counsel, the instructions contained in paragraph 161
of L.R. Manual should be strictly followed. The presiding officers should also ensure
that-
(1) they give prior notice to the State Counsel of the time when the case in which
he is to appear will be taken up by them;
(2) If there is not full day's work for a State Counsel the work should be so
adjusted as not to exceed half days's fee;
(3) they so arrange their work as not to necessitate payment of double fee in any
case whatsoever.
468
In order to obviate payment of full day's fee to more than one State Counsel for
the same day, the presiding officers should avoid, as far as possible to allow a sessions
trial to remain part heard.
 Certification of fees by legal practitioner
G.L.No.25/67-5 dated 7th October, 1944

It is not open to counsel who receives an annual honorarium retainer to certify as
fees in a case either the whole or any part of that retainer.
18.
EVIDENCE
(i)
Expert opinion
G.L.No.3209/47-25 (1) dated 1st October, 1923

When a judicial authority considers a second opinion on a disputed finger print
necessary the case should be referred to an expert from another finger print bureau.
C.L.No.60/b-39 dated 5th October, 1966

All presiding officers should see that the writs of commission issued to the
District Judge, Lucknow, for taking statement of the Finger Print Expert, Lucknow, are in
order and contain all the essential papers, so that unnecessary delay in executing the
Commissions may be avoided.
(ii)
 Examination of transferred government servants
C.L.No.128/VII-b-68 dated 16th December, 1972
While fixing dates in criminal cases particularly in the courts of the Magistrates it
should be borne in mind that the dates for the evidence of magistrates, doctors, and be
borne other government servants, who are witnesses but have been transferred to other
stations, should be so adjusted that their evidence is recorded in as many cases as possible
on one and the same date or on two or more consecutive dates. The sessions clerk or the
ahalmad may check from the dealing clerks of other courts as to when a particular
magistrate, etc. is coming in that court for evidence. The request, if any made by such
witnesses for recording their evidence on one of the several dates (with small gaps) fixed
in various cases at a particular station should also be considered favourably. If such a
witness does not appear in obedience to court's process, the last summons before issuing
a warrant be issued through the immediate controlling officer of the witness and it should
be made clear that if the witness does not appear a warrant would be issued. Finally if a
warrant is issued a copy thereof may be endorsed to the authority through which the last
summons was issued.
C.L.No.5/VIIb-68 dated 22nd January, 1987
The evidence of a judicial officer is normally of formal nature only, and it may
not be necessary to summon a judicial officer for giving evidence.

Hence, summonses for judicial officers should be issued only when it is
absolutely necessary.