Page 1

1

REPORTABLE  IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

SUO MOTU WRIT(CRL.) NO.1 OF 2017  

IN RE: TO ISSUE CERTAIN GUIDELINES REGARDING INADEQUACIES AND DEFICIENCIES IN CRIMINAL TRIALS     

                        O R D E R

During  the  course  of  hearing  of  Criminal  Appeal No.400/2006 and connected matters, Mr. R. Basant, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants-complainant, pointed out certain common inadequacies and deficiencies in the course of trial adopted by the trial court while disposing  of  criminal  cases.  In  particular,  it  was pointed out that though there are beneficial provisions in the Rules of some of the High Courts which ensure that certain documents such as list of witnesses and the list of exhibits/material objects referred to, are annexed to the judgment and order itself of the trial court, these features  do  not  exist  in  Rules   of  some  other  High Courts.  Undoubtedly,  the  judgments  and  orders  of  the trial  court  which  have  such  lists  annexed,  can  be appreciated much better by the appellate courts.  

Certain  other  matters  were  also  pointed  out  by Mr. Basant, learned Senior Counsel for the appellants- complainant, during the course of arguments. He made the

Page 2

2

following submissions :  

A. In  the  course  of  discussions  at  the  Bar  while considering this case, this Court had generally adverted to  certain  common  inadequacies  and  imperfections  that occur in the criminal trials in our country. I venture to suggest that in the interests of better administration of criminal  justice  and  to  usher  in  a  certain  amount  of uniformity, and acceptance of best practices prevailing over  various  parts  of  India,  this  Court  may  consider issue of certain general guidelines to be followed across the board by all Criminal Courts in the country.

B. The following areas may be considered specifically: 1. The  pernicious  practice  of  the  Trial  Judge leaving  the  recording  of  deposition  to  the  clerk concerned and recording of evidence going on in more than one case in the same Court room, at the same time, under the presence and general supervision of the presiding officer has to be disapproved strongly and discontinued forthwith. A visit to Delhi Trial Courts any day will reveal this sad state of affairs, I am given to understand. 2. The depositions of witnesses must be recorded, in typed format, using computers, in Court, to the dictation  of  the  presiding  officers  (in  English wherever possible) so that readable true copies will

Page 3

3

be available straightaway and can be issued to both sides on the date of examination itself. 3. The  deposition  of  each  witness  must  be recorded  dividing  it  into  separate  paragraphs assigning para numbers to facilitate easy reference to specific portions later in the course of arguments and in Judgments. 4. Witnesses/documents/material  objects  be assigned  specific  nomenclature  and  numbers  like PWs/DWs/CWs  (1  onwards);  Ext.  P/Ext.  D/Ext.  C  (1 onwards); MOs (1 onwards) etc., so that reference later becomes easy and less time-consuming. Kindly see the Relevant Rules  Kerala Criminal Rules of Practice 1982

“Rule 62 – Marking of exhibits.-  (1) Exhibits admitted in evidence shall be marked as follows: (i) If  filed  by  the  prosecution,  with  capital

letter P followed by a numeral P1, P2, P3 etc

(ii) If filed by defence, with capital letter D followed by a numeral D1, D2, D3 etc

(iii) If Court exhibits, with capital letter C followed by a numeral C1, C2, C3 etc.

(2) All exhibits marked by several accused shall be marked consecutively. (3) All material objects shall be marked in Arabic numbers  in  continuous  series,  whether  exhibited for the prosecution or the defence or the Court as M.O.1, M.O.2, M.O.3, etc”

Andhra Pradesh Criminal rules of Practice and Circular Orders, 1990

Page 4

4

“Rule 66 – How witness shall be referred to Witnesses shall be referred by their names or ranks as P.W.s., or D.Ws., and if the witnesses are not examined, but cited in the chargesheet, they should be  referred  by  their  names  and  not  by  numbers allotted to them in the charge-sheet.”

5. Every judgment must mandatorily have a preface showing  the  name  of  the  parties  and  an  appendix showing  the  list  of  Prosecutions  Witnesses, Prosecution  Exhibits,  Defence  Witnesses,  Defence Exhibits,  Court  witnesses,  Court  Exhibits  and Material Objects. Kindly see inter alia the Relevant rules in the Kerala Criminal Rules of Practice, 1982.

“Rule  132  –  Judgment  to  contain  certain particulars.- The Judgment in original decision shall, apart from the particulars prescribed by Section  354  of  the  Code  also  contain  a statement in Tabular Form giving the following particulars, namely:-

1. Serial Number 2. Name of the Police Station and  

the Crime No. of the offence 3. Name

Description of the Accused4. Father's name 5. Occupation  6. Residence 7. Age 8. Occurrence  

Date of 9. Complaint 10. Apprehension 11. Release on bail 12. Commitment 13. Commencement of trial 14. Close of trial 15. Sentence or order 16. Service of copy of judgment or

Page 5

5

finding on accused 17. Explanation of delay

Note.- (1) Date of complaint in column 9 shall be the  date  of  the  filing  of  the  charge-sheet  in respect of case instituted on police report and the date of filing of the complaint in respect of other case.  (2) Date of apprehension in column 10 shall be the date of arrest. (3) Date of commencement of trial in column 13 shall be :

(a) In summons cases, the date on which the particulars of the offence are stated to the accused under section 251 of the Code.  (b)  In  warrant  cases  instituted  on  police report,  the  date  on  which  the  documents under section 207 of the Code are furnished to the accused and the Magistrate satisfied himself of the same under section 238 of the Code.  (c)  In  other  warrant  cases,  when  the recording  of  evidence  is  commenced  under section 244 of the Code. (d) In Sessions trials, when the charge is read out and explained to the accused under section 228 of the Code.  

“Rule 134 – List of witnesses etc. to be Appended to Judgement.  

There  shall  be  appended  to  every  judgment  a list  of  the  witnesses  examined  by  the prosecution  and  for  the  defence  and  by  the Court and also a list of exhibits and material objects marked.”  

Page 6

6

6. Once  numbers  are  assigned  to  the  accused, witnesses  and  exhibits,  they  be  referred  to, subsequently in the proceedings and in the judgments with the help of such numbers only. The practice of referring to the names of the accused/witnesses and documents descriptively in the proceedings paper and judgments creates a lot of confusion. Whenever there is  need  to  refer  to  them  by  name  their  rank  as Accused/Witness must be shown in brackets.  7. Repetition  of  pleadings,  evidence,  and arguments in the judgments and orders of the Trial Court, Appellate and Revisional Courts be avoided. Repetition of facts, evidence, and contentions before lower Courts make the judgments cumbersome, and takes away the precious time of the Court unnecessarily. The Appellate/Revisional Court judgment/order is the continuation of the lower court judgment and must ideally start with “ in this appeal/revision, the impugned  judgment  is  assailed  on  the  following grounds” or “the points that arise for consideration in  this  appeal/revision  are”.  This  does  not  of course,  take  away  the  option/jurisdiction  of  the Appellate/Revisional Courts to re-narrate facts and contentions if they be inadequately or insufficiently narrated in the judgment. Mechanical re narration to be avoided at any rate.  

Page 7

7

8. In every case file, a judgment folder to be maintained,  and  the  first  para  in  the appellate/revisional judgment to be numbered as the next paragraph after the last para in the impugned judgment. This would cater to a better culture of judgment writing saving precious court time. 9. The  healthy  practice  in  some  states  of  the Investigating Officer obtaining and producing (or the wound certificate/ post mortem certificate showing) the front and rear sketch of the human torso showing the  injuries  listed  in  the  medical  documents specifically, may be uniformly insisted. This would help  the  judges  to  have  a  clearer  and  surer understanding of the situs of the injuries. 10. Marking of contradictions – A healthy practice of marking the contradictions/Omissions properly does not appear to exist in several States. Ideally the relevant portions of case diary statement used for contradicting a witness must be extracted fully in the deposition. If the same is cumbersome at least the opening and closing words of the contradiction in the case diary statement must be referred to in the deposition  and  marked  separately  as  a Prosecution/Defence exhibit. 11. The  practice  of  omnibus  marking  of  S.  164 statement of witness deserves to be deprecated. The

Page 8

8

relevant portion of such prior statements of living persons used for contradiction or corroboration U/s. 145/157 of the Evidence Act deserves to be marked separately and specifically. 12. The  practice  of  whole  sale  marking  of confession  statement  of  accused  persons  for introduction  of  the  relevant  statement  admissible under  S.  27  of  Evidence  Act  deserves  to  be deprecated. Ideally the admissible portion  and that portion  alone,  must  be  extracted  in  the  recovery memos (Mahazar or Panch – different nomenclature used in  different  parts  of  the  land)  within  inverted commas. Otherwise the relevant portion alone written separately  must  be  proved  by  the  Investigating Officer. Back door access to inadmissible evidence by marking  the  entire  confession  statement  in  the attempt to prove the admissible portion under S. 27 of Evidence Act should be strictly avoided. 13. The Trial Courts must be mandatorily obliged to specify in the Judgment the period of set off under Section 428 Cr.P.C specifying date and not leave it to be resolved later by jail authorities or successor presiding officers. The Judgements and the consequent warrant of committal must specify the period of set off clearly.

Page 9

9

In  the  circumstances,  we  direct  that  notices  be issued to the Registrars General of all the High Courts, and  the  Chief  Secretaries/the  Administrators  and  the Advocates-General/Senior  Standing  Counsel  of  all  the States/Union Territories, so that general consensus can be arrived at on the need to amend the relevant Rules of Practice/ Criminal Manuals to bring about uniform best practices across the country. This Court may also consider issuance  of  directions  under  Article  142  of  the Constitution.  They  can  be  given  the  option  to  give suggestions also on other areas of concern.

.........................J [S. A. BOBDE]

........................J [L. NAGESWARA RAO]

New Delhi;  MARCH 30, 2017.