# trial to remain part heard

- **Citation:** C.L.No.60/b-39
- **Court:** Allahabad High Court
- **Decided:** 1974-01-01
- **Case number:** C.L.No.60/b-39
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/trial-to-remain-part-heard-163892
- **Pages:** 2

## Text

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.
469
C.E.No.17/VIIb-32 dated 28th February, 1963

Sessions courts should not detain the Magistrates unnecessarily and record their
evidence on the date they are summoned.
C.L.No.89/VIII-h-13 dated 5th/6th May, 1974
Strict compliance of the aforesaid instructions as also the instructions contained in
Government Circular Letter No.7216/11(2)-73, dated January 1, 1974, in the matter of
adjournment of cases and fixing dates for the examination of government servants
coming from distant places especially from hill areas be made.
(iii)
Script of evidence
G.L.No.8/X-e-5 dated 11th August, 1951

Presiding officers will be guided solely by the provisions of the Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908, and the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, bearing in mind the fact that
the language of all subordinate courts now is Hindi written in Devanagri script.
G.L.No. 19/x-e and 20/x-e-5 dated 16th October, 1951

Where the translation or transliteration in Hindi of any English technical term
used by a witness in the course of his statements is likely to cause confusion or difficulty
in understanding the correct import of such term, courts should, while recording the
deposition of such witness in Hindi, also put down within brackets against such
translation or transliteration the actual English term used by him in his evidence.
C.L.No.4/IV-h-19 dated 17th January, 1972

It is the personal responsibility of the Sessions Judge to see that the record of
evidence is kept legibly and in very correct manner. Legible writing is enjoined by rule
53 of General Rules (Criminal) also.
C.L.No.35 dated 12th April, 1968

With a view to facilitate reference of a particular portion of the deposition by the
advocate during arguments, the deposition should be recorded in proper paragraphs and
such paragraphs should be serially numbered.
C.L.No.63/VIII-b-32 dated 13th October, 1966

Instructions contained in C.L.No.42/VII-b-32, dated May 4, 1951 are withdrawn
because of deletion of rule 14(1) and amendment of rule 8 of Order XVIII C.P.C.

In criminal cases, however, under section 275, Cr.P.C., it is open to the Presiding
Officer to record evidence in his own hand or have it recorded from his dictation in open
court, or cause the same to be recorded in his presence and hearing under his personal
direction and superintendence. If the evidence is not taken down in own hand or from
dictation in open court, it is open for the presiding officer to record in his own hand a
memorandum of substance of evidence and in that case he has also to give the reasons of
his inability to do so.