Allahabad High Court
State Of U.P. vs Jalim on 10 March, 2011
Bench: Amar Saran, Arvind Kumar Tripathi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 46
Case :- GOVERNMENT APPEAL No. - 1190 of 2003
Petitioner :- State Of U.P.
Respondent :- Jalim
Petitioner Counsel :- A.G.A.
Hon'ble Amar Saran,J.
Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Tripathi,J.
On 3.1.2011 this Court had passed an order issuing non-bailable warrants through the CJM concerned directing production of the accused respondent Jalim on 21.2.11 after the learned A.G.A. had stated that as per information from the Police Station concerned the accused was not traceable. When the case was called out today we find that a report dated 15.2.2011 has been received from the Chief Judicial Magistrate in which it is mentioned that according to the police report Jalim, the accused respondent was not traceable at the address given. He was also not traceable in the Mohalla Shantapuri Colony and the new abadi which is adjoining the village of the accused respondent. The persons contacted also gave no information about any one with the name of Jalim. We are not satisfied with the steps taken by the police to secure the presence of the accused respondent.
In such situations normally when an accused is not traceable at a particular address, we grant time to the learned A.G.A. to find out the correct address of the accused respondent. The case is then adjourned. The fact is that the A.G.A. has only the police machinery to rely on. He again writes to the police who try to find out the address. Then the summons or bailable or non-bailable warrants for the production of the accused are sent at the new address furnished, and the Court is required to spend 10 or 15 more minutes of its precious time to again pass miscellaneous orders for production of the accused.
Hence we think that at this stage a general direction needs to be issued to the Director General (Police) by this Court to direct the SSPs/SPs in all districts that in all cases when the accused person cannot be traced out at the address given, it becomes the duty of the police to get the accused persons traced out by finding out his changed address (if any) by contacting the complainant, relations of the accused and other person of the locality or elsewhere, and he may also obtain necessary orders from the CJM under section 82/ 83 Cr.P.C or other provisions of the Code in order to ensure the presence of the accused respondent in the Government Appeal on the date fixed by the High Court. We therefore direct the D.G.(Police), U.P. to consider issuing a circular/ D.O. letter on the above mentioned lines so that the time of the Court may not be unnecessarily wasted, in giving an opportunity to learned A.G.A., in each and every case to contact the police for finding out the address of the accused respondent and thereafter for issuing directions for searching out/ apprehending the accused at the new address given. In view of section 70(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure it is clear that the warrant for production of the accused remains pending till it is executed or it is cancelled by the Court issuing it.
The Registrar General may also issue general directions to the District Judges/ CJMs and other concerned Magistrates for passing appropriate orders and issuing various processes open in law and supporting the police officials concerned for ensuring the presence of the accused in person or through counsel as this Court may have directed, without awaiting fresh orders from the High Court where the accused is not traceable at the address given or he has absconded and is not responding to the directions of this Court to appear in person or through counsel as the case may be.
In the present case we further direct the S.S.P., Saharanpur to get the accused respondent traced out within a month and to submit a report on 2.5.2011, on which date the accused should be produced in this Court. If the accused is not traced out and produced on the said date, the concerned police officer shall appear in person before this Court submit a report regarding the steps taken for searching out the accused respondent and the reason for his non production. It is made clear that if we are not satisfied with the steps taken by the S.H.O. in apprehending the said accused we may have no option but to summon the S.S.P. on a subsequent date.
The Registrar General is directed to forward a copy of this order to the Director General (Police), SSP, Saharanpur, District Judges of all districts for communication to subordinate officers within two weeks. We would also like a response from the DG (Prisons) on the directions to be issued by him as mentioned hereinabove.
Let a copy of this order be given to the learned A.G.A. within a week for compliance.
List this case again on 2.5.2011 along with the aforesaid compliance reports.
Order Date :- 10.3.2011
Rk
