IN RE: TO ISSUE CERTAIN GUIDELINES REGARDING INADEQUACIES AND DEFICIENCIES IN CRIMINAL TRIALS versus THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ORS. on 20 April 2021

ORDER

DThe following order of the Court was passed:

ORDER

1. This suo motu proceeding under Article 32 was initiated duringthe course of hearing of a criminal appeal[1]. The Court noticed commondeficiencies which occur in the course of criminal trials and certainEpractices adopted by trial courts in criminal proceedings as well as in thedisposal of criminal cases and causes. These related, amongst others, tothe manner in which documents (i.e. list of witnesses, list of exhibits, listof material objects) referred to are presented and exhibited in thejudgment, and the lack of uniform practices in regard to preparation ofinjury reports, deposition of witnesses, translation of statements,Fnumbering and nomenclature of witnesses, labeling of material objects,etc. These very often lead to asymmetries and hamper appreciation ofevidence, which in turn has a tendency of prolonging proceedings,especially at the appellate stages.

2. The Court had noticed that on these prominent aspects, rulesGappeared to have been formulated by certain High Courts, whereas manyother High Courts have not framed such rules. This has led to a lack ofclarity and uniformity in regard to the presentation of trial courtproceedings and records, for the purpose of appreciation at the HighCourt level and eventually, before this court.

H1 Crl.A.400/2006 & connected matters

3. By an elaborate order dated 30.03.2017, this Court noted varioussalient aspects and flagged inadequacies in the practices and rules ofHigh Courts by taking a cue from existing rules in some High Courts[2].After noticing about 13 issues, the Court felt the desirability of a uniformapproach – in description of exhibits, manner and description of recordingof statements of witnesses, labeling of material objects, and so on. TheCourt therefore, issued notice to the Registrar Generals of all High Courts,Chief Secretaries and Administrators of States and Union Territories aswell as Advocates General, Additional Advocates Generals and SeniorStanding Counsel of all states and Union Territories. By a later orderdated 07.11.2017, the Court appointed Mr. Sidharth Luthra and Mr. R.Basanth, Senior Advocates as amici curiae. On 20.02.2018, Mr. K.Parameshwar, learned counsel was also appointed as amicus curiae toassist the senior counsel who were earlier appointed as amici curiae.All concerned State Governments and Union Territories as well as HighCourts through their Registrar Generals were called upon to submit theirresponses along with suggestions.

4. By January 2019, 15 States/Union Territories and 21 HighCourts had filed responses before this court. Based upon these responses,the amici curiae evolved a consultation paper, which inter alia containeddraft rules. The draft rules were circulated to all parties by a letter dated18.02.2019. Written responses were invited from stakeholders and acolloquium was convened for this purpose in New Delhi at the IndiaInternational Centre, on 30.03.2019. The colloquium was attended byrepresentatives of different States/Union Territories and their respectiveHigh Courts.

5. After considering the suggestions made during the colloquium,the amici curiae submitted the “Draft Rules of Criminal Practice, 2020”for the consideration of this court. While framing Draft Rules, due carewas taken to ensure uniformity and at the same time to recognize thediverse practices among the various state authorities and High Courts inthe country. The draft rules are compliant and not in any way repugnantto the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Many suggestions made aspractice directions reflect the mandatory provisions of the Code ofCriminal Procedure, 1973.

6. By later orders dated 27.10.2020 and 19.01.2021, the HighCourtswereonce again directed to file their responses to the Draft 2 Kerala Criminal Rules of Practice, 1982; Andhra Pradesh Criminal Rules of Practicesand Circular Orders, 1990 etc.

AB

C

D

E

F

G

H

ARules of Criminal Practice, 2020. Pursuant to that order, all High Courtsfiled their responses and the summaries of the responses.

7. During the hearing, this court noticed that most of the suggestionshad been agreed except in regard to a few aspects. Some High Courts,while accepting the Draft Rules also sought to elaborate and supplementBthem, which is a welcome step.

8. The High Courts unanimously welcomed the suggestion ofseparating the prosecution from the investigation, (i.e. Rule 18 in theDraft Rules, 2020) which provides that a separate team of lawyers,distinct from Public Prosecutors must advise the police during theCinvestigation. However, as pointed out by many High Courts, this is astep that should be actively pursued by the State Governments. Similarly,the High Courts welcomed the uniform manner in which body sketches,spot panchnamas etc. are to be brought on record (Draft Rules 1-4).However, they state that the onus for the implementation of these Rulesis on the investigation agencies.D

9. This court is of the opinion that a perusal of the responsesindicates that the High Courts have indicated their reservations to certaindraft rules. These are as follows:

(1) translations of deposition [Draft Rule 6(i)(ii)] – High CourtEof Madhya Pradesh, Kerala, Tamil Nadu.

(2) references to accused/witnesses/material objects (DraftRule 9) – Allahabad, MP, Tripura, Kerala, Calcutta – TheHigh Courts have suggested that along with the numbersassigned to the witness, accused etc., names may also beused to avoid confusion.

F

(3) The rule requiring day to day trial (Rule 19(i)) – MadhyaPradesh, Manipur, Tripura.

10. During the hearing of these proceedings, the court took intoconsideration the viewpoints, on behalf of High Courts, where thereGwas either a divergence in the opinion about the practice to be adopted,or some reservation.

11. The amici pointed out that at the commencement of trial,accused are only furnished with list of documents and statements whichthe prosecution relies on and are kept in the dark about other material, H

which the police or the prosecution may have in their possession, whichmay be exculpatory in nature, or absolve or help the accused. This courtis of the opinion that while furnishing the list of statements, documentsand material objects under Sections 207/208, Cr. PC, the magistrateshould also ensure that a list of other materials, (such as statements, orobjects/documents seized, but not relied on) should be furnished to theaccused. This is to ensure that in case the accused is of the view thatsuch materials are necessary to be produced for a proper and just trial,she or he may seek appropriate orders, under the Cr. PC.[3]for theirproduction during the trial, in the interests of justice. It is directedaccordingly; the draft rules have been accordingly modified. [Rule 4(i)]

12. It was pointed out by learned amici that the practice adoptedpredominantly in all trials is guided by the decision of this court in BipinShantilal Panchal v. State of Gujarat[4] with respect to objectionsregarding questions to be put to witnesses. This court had termed thepractice of deciding the objections, immediately as “archaic” andindicated what it felt was an appropriate course:

“It is an archaic practice that during the evidence collectingstage, whenever any objection is raised regardingadmissibility of any material in evidence the court does notproceed further without passing order on such objection. Butthe fall out of the above practice is this: Suppose the trialcourt, in a case, upholds a particular objection and excludesthe material from being admitted in evidence and then proceeds

391. Summons to produce document or other thing.

(1) Whenever any Court or any officer in charge of a police station considers that theproduction of any document or other thing is necessary or desirable for the purposes ofany investigation, inquiry, trial or other proc eeding under this Code by or before suchCourt or officer, such Court may issue a summons, or such officer a written order, to theperson in whose possession or power such document or thing is believed to be, requiringhim to attend and produce it, or to produce it, at the time and place stated in thesummons or order.

(2) Any person required under this section merely to produce a document or other thingshall be deemed to have complied with the requisition if he causes such document orthing to be produc ed instead of attending personally to produce the same.(3) Nothing in this section shall be deemed- (a) to affect sections 123 and 124 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872 ), or theBankers’ Books Evidence Act, 1891 (13 of 1891) or

(c) to apply to a letter, postcard, telegram or other document or any parcel or thing in thecustody of the postal or telegraph authority.

4 (2001) 3 SCC 1

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

with the trial and disposes of the case finally. If the appellateor revisional court, when the same question is re-canvassed,could take a different view on the admissibility of that materialin such cases the appellate court would be deprived of thebenefit of that evidence, because that was not put on recordby the trial court. In such a situation the higher court mayhave to send the case back to the trial court for recordingthat evidence and then to dispose of the case afresh. Whyshould the trial prolong like that unnecessarily on accountof practices created by ourselves. Such practices, whenrealised through the course of long period to be hindranceswhich impede steady and swift progress of trial proceedings,must be recast or re-moulded to give way for better substituteswhich would help acceleration of trial proceedings.

When so recast, the practice which can be a better substituteis this: Whenever an objection is raised during evidencetaking stage regarding the admissibility of any material oritem of oral evidence the trial court can make a note of suchobjection and mark the objected document tentatively as anexhibit in the case (or record the objected part of the oralevidence) subject to such objections to be decided at the laststage in the final judgment. If the court finds at the final stagethat the objection so raised is sustainable the judge ormagistrate can keep such evidence excluded fromconsideration. In our view there is no illegality in adoptingsuch a course. (However, we make it clear that if the objectionrelates to deficiency of stamp duty of a document the courthas to decide the objection before proceeding further. Forall other objections the procedure suggested above can befollowed.) The above procedure, if followed, will have twoadvantages. First is that the time in the trial court, duringevidence taking stage, would not be wasted on account ofraising such objections and the court can continue to examinethe witnesses. The witnesses need not wait for long hours, ifnot days. Second is that the superior court, when the sameobjection is re-canvassed and reconsidered in appeal orrevision against the final judgment of the trial court, candetermine the correctness of the view taken by the trial courtregarding that objection, without bothering to remit the case

to the trial court again for fresh disposal. We may also pointout that this measure would not cause any prejudice to theparties to the litigation and would not add to their misery orexpenses.”

13. It was argued by amici that the procedure, whereby the courtsrecord answers to all questions, regardless of objections, leads toprolonged and lengthy cross examination, and more often than not,irrelevant facts having no bearing on the charge or the role of the accused,are brought on record, which often result in great prejudice. It is pointedout that due to the practice mandated in Bipin Shantilal Panchal (supra),such material not only enters the record, but even causes prejudice,which is greatly multiplied when the appellate court has to decide theissue. Frequently, given that trials are prolonged, the trial courts do notdecide upon these objections at the final stage, as neither counseladdresses arguments. Therefore, it is submitted that the rule in BipinShantilal Panchal (supra) requires reconsideration.

14. During a trial, in terms of Section 132, every witness is boundto answer the questions she or he is asked; however, that is subject tothe caveat that he or she is entitled to claim silence, if the answersincriminate him or her, by virtue of Article 20 (3) of the Constitution.Every judge who presides over a criminal trial, has the authority andduty to decide on the validity or relevance of questions asked of witnesses.This is to be found in Section 148 Cr. PC, which reads as follows:

“148. Court to decide when question shall be asked and whenwitness compelled to answer. –– If any such question relatesto a matter not relevant to the suit or proceeding, except in sofar as it affects the credit of the witness by injuring hischaracter, the Court shall decide whether or not the witnessshall be compelled to answer it, and may, if it thinks fit, warnthe witness that he is not obliged to answer it.

In exercising its discretion, the Court shall have regard to thefollowing considerations: ––

(1) such questions are proper if they are of such a nature thatthe truth of the imputation conveyed by them would seriouslyaffect the opinion of the Court as to the credibility of thewitness on the matter to which he testifies; A

BC

DE

F

G

H

A(2) such questions are improper if the imputation which theyconvey relates to matters so remote in time, or of such acharacter, that the truth of the imputation would not affect,or would affect in a slight degree, the opinion of the Court asto the credibility of the witness on the matter to which hetestifies;B

(3) such questions are improper if there is a great disproportionbetween the importance of the imputation made against thewitness’s character and the importance of his evidence;

(4) the Court may, if it sees fit, draw, from the witness’s refusalCto answer, the inference that the answer if given would beunfavourable”

15. Apart from Section 148, there are other provisions of theEvidence Act (Sections 149-154) which define the ground rules for crossexamination. During questioning, no doubt, the counsel for the partyDseeking cross examination has considerable leeway; cross examinationis not confined to matters in issue, but extends to all relevant facts.However, if the court is not empowered to rule, during the proceeding,whether a line of questioning is relevant, the danger lies in irrelevant,vague and speculative answers entering the record. Further, based onthe answers to what (subsequently turn out to be irrelevant, vague orEotherwise impermissible questions) more questions might be asked andanswered. If this process were to be repeated in case of most witnesses,the record would be cluttered with a jumble of irrelevant details, whichat best can be distracting, and at worst, prejudicial to the accused.Therefore, this court is of opinion that the view in Bipin ShantilalFPanchal should not be considered as binding. The presiding officertherefore, should decide objections to questions, during the course ofthe proceeding, or failing it at the end of the deposition of theconcerned witness. This will result in de-cluttering the record, and, whatis more, also have a salutary effect of preventing frivolous objections. Ingiven cases, if the court is of the opinion that repeated objections haveGbeen taken, the remedy of costs, depending on the nature of obstruction,and the proclivity of the line of questioning, may be resorted to.Accordingly, the practice mandated in Bipin Shantilal Panchal shallstand modified in the above terms.

16. Counsel appearing for the states and High Courts submittedHthat the provision in the draft rules, requiring that trials should be conducted on a day-to-day manner, cannot be complied with. It was argued thatcourts have to, more often than not, postpone or adjourn cases due tonon-availability of witnesses, or on account of absence of defense counsel,or the prosecutor. The learned amici submitted that given that trial beginsafter charges have been framed, the prosecution witnesses should beavailable on the dates of trial, for the simple reason that they are reliedon for proving the charges. It was submitted that this court should indicatethat as far as practicable, the trial court should carry out before hand,sequencing of witness deposition, in terms of eyewitnesses, other materialwitnesses, formal witnesses, expert witnesses etc., and also factor insome specific date or dates, so that effective depositions are recordedon every date of hearing so fixed.

17. This court is of the opinion that the courts in all criminal trialsshould, at the beginning of the trial, i.e. after summoning of the accused,and framing of charges, hold a preliminary case management hearing.This hearing may take place immediately after the framing of the charge.In this hearing, the court should consider the total number of witnesses,and classify them as eyewitness, material witness, formal witness (whowould be asked to produce documents, etc) and experts. At that stage,the court should consider whether the parties are in a position to admitany document (including report of experts, or any document that may beproduced by the accused, or relied on by her or him). If so, the exerciseof admission/denial may be carried out under Section 294, Cr. PC, forwhich a specific date may be fixed. The schedule of recording ofwitnesses should then be fixed, by giving consecutive dates. Each dateso fixed, should be scheduled for a specific number of witnesses.However, the concerned witnesses may be bound down to appear for 2-

3 consecutive dates, in case their depositions are not concluded. Also, incase any witness does not appear, or cannot be examined, the courtshall indicate a fixed date for such purpose. The recording of depositionof witnesses shall then be taken up, after the scheduling exercise iscomplete. This court has appropriately carried out necessary amendmentsto the Draft Rules.

18. It was submitted by the amici that as regards the subjectmatter relating to the first three Draft Rules, the state and policeauthorities have to carry out necessary and consequential amendmentsto the police manuals, and other related instructions, to be followed byeach state. Counsel appearing for states and union territories have assured AB

C

D

E

F

G

H

Athat suitable steps to incorporate the Draft Rules - relating to (1) Bodysketch to accompany medico-legal certificate, post-mortem report andinquest report –[Draft Rule No. 1]; (2) Photographs and Video graphsof post mortem in certain cases [Draft Rule No. 2] and (3) SceneMahazar/ Spot Panchanama [Draft Rule No. 3] would be taken at theearliest.B

19. The court is of the opinion that the Draft Rules of CriminalPractice, 2021, (which are annexed to the present order, and shall beread as part of it) should be hereby finalized in terms of the abovediscussion. The following directions are hereby issued:

(a) All High Courts shall take expeditious steps to incorporateCthe said Draft Rules, 2021 as part of the rules governingcriminal trials, and ensure that the existing rules,notifications, orders and practice directions are suitablymodified, and promulgated (wherever necessary throughthe Official Gazette) within 6 months from today. If theDstate government’s co-operation is necessary in this regard,the approval of the concerned department or departments,and the formal notification of the said Draft Rules, shall bemade within the said period of six months.

(b) The state governments, as well as the Union of India (inrelation to investigating agencies in its control) shall carryEout consequential amendments to their police and othermanuals, within six months from today. This direction applies,specifically in respect of Draft Rules 1-3. The appropriateforms and guidelines shall be brought into force, and allagencies instructed accordingly, within six months fromFtoday.

20. The court hereby places its appreciation and gratitude to thecontributions and effort of the three amici Shri Siddharth Luthra, Shri R.Basanth (Senior Advocates) and Shri K. Parameshwar, Advocate - theygave valuable inputs and innumerable suggestions, considered allGsuggestions given by various stakeholders, reported to the court andmade extremely useful submissions. The court also places on record itsappreciation of Shri A. Karthik, Ms. Mehak Jaggi and Shri M.V.Mukunda, Advocate, who rendered valuable assistance to the amici.

21. The suo motu proceeding is disposed of in terms of the abovedirections.H

A

DRAFT CRIMINAL RULES ON PRACTICE, 2021CHAPTER I. INVESTIGATION

1. BODY SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY MEDICO LEGALCERTIFICATE, POST MORTEM REPORT AND INQUESTREPORT:

B

Every Medico Legal Certificate, Post Mortem Report shall containa printed format of the human body on its reverse and injuries, if any,shall be indicated on such sketch.

Explanation: The printed format of the human body shall containboth a frontal and rear view of the human body as provided inANNEXURE – A

C

2. PHOTOGRAPHS AND VIDEO GRAPHS OF POSTMORTEM IN CERTAIN CASES

i.In case of death of a person in police action [under Section46 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973(“Cr.PC”) or SectionsD129 to 131 Cr.PC] or death while in police custody, themagistrate or the Investigating Officer as the case may be,shall inform the hospital or doctor in charge to arrange forphotographs or videography for conducting the post-mortemexamination of the deceased. The photographs of theEdeceased shall also be arranged to be taken in all cases.

ii.Such photograph and video graphs shall be taken either byarranging a police photographer or a nominated photographerof the State Government, and where neither of the aboveare available, an independent or private photographer shallbe engaged.

F

iii.Such photographs or video graphs shall be seized under apanchnama or seizure memo and all steps taken to ensureproper proof of such photographs/video graphs during Trial.

iv.The Investigating Officer shall ensure that such photographsand videographs, if taken electronically, are seized under apanchnama or seizure memo and steps are taken topreserve the original, and ensure that certificate underSection 65B Indian Evidence Act, 1872 is obtained and takento be proved during trial.

G

H

Av.The video or photographs shall be stored on a separatememory card, accompanied by a duly certified certificateunder Section 65B Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

vi.Where post-mortems are recorded in electronic form, thefile containing the post-mortem proceedings, duly certified,Bshould be placed with the memory card as an attachmentunless individual memory cards are not capable of beingproduced before Court.

3. SCENE MAHAZAR/ SPOT PANCHANAMA

i.A site plan of the place of occurrence of an incident shallCbe appended by the Investigating Officer to the scenemahazar or spot panchnama.

ii.The site plan shall be prepared by the Investigating Officerby hand, and shall disclose a.the place of occurrence, D

b.the place where the body (or bodies) was / werefound,

c.the place where material exhibits and/or weapons, d.blood stains and/or body fluids had fallen, E

e.the place where bullet shells, if any, were found orhave caused impact, f.the source of light, if any and g.adjoining natural and man-made structures or featuresFsuch as walls, pits, fences, trees/bushes, if any andh.elevation of structures and their location.

iii.The preparation of this sketch by the Investigating Officershall be followed by a scaled site plan prepared by policedraftsman, if available, or such other authorized orGnominated draftsman by the State Government, who shallprepare the scaled site plan after visiting the spot.

iv.The relevant details in the mahazar or panchnama shallbe marked and correlated in the said site plan.

H

IN RE: TO ISSUE CERTAIN GUIDELINES REGARDING INADEQUACIES ANDDEFICIENCIES IN CRIMINAL TRIALS v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

4. SUPPLY OF DOCUMENTS UNDER SECTIONS 173, 207 AND 208 CR.PC

i.Every Accused shall be supplied with statements of witnessrecorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.PC and a list ofdocuments, material objects and exhibits seized duringinvestigation and relied upon by the Investigating Officer(I.O) in accordance with Sections 207 and 208, Cr. PC.

Explanation: The list of statements, documents, materialobjects and exhibits shall specify statements, documents,material objects and exhibits that are not relied upon by theInvestigating Officer.

CHAPTER II: CHARGE

5. The order framing charge shall be accompanied by a formalcharge in Form 32, Schedule II, Cr.P.C. to be prepared personally by thePresiding Officer after complete and total application of mind.

CHAPTER III:TRIAL

6. RECORDING OF EVIDENCE: PROCEDURE

i.The depositions of witnesses shall be recorded, in typedformat, if possible. The record of evidence shall be preparedon computers, if available, in the Court on the dictation ofthe Presiding Officer.

Provided that in case the language of deposition is to berecorded in a language other than English or the languageof the State, the Presiding Officer shall simultaneouslytranslate the deposition either himself or through acompetent translator into English.

ii.The deposition shall be recorded in the language of thewitness and in English when translated as provided in Clause6 (i).

iii.The depositions shall without exception be read over by thePresiding officer in Court. Hard copy of the testimony sorecorded duly signed to be a true copy by the PresidingOfficer/court officer shall be made available free of costagainst receipt to the accused or an advocate representing A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

Athe accused, to the witness and the prosecutor on the dateof recording.

iv.A translator shall be made available in each Court andPresiding Officers shall be trained in the local languages,on the request of the Presiding Officer.

B

v.The Presiding Officers shall not record evidence in morethan one case at the same time.

7. RECORDING OF EVIDENCE: FORMAT OFWITNESSES

i.The deposition of each witness shall be recorded dividing itinto separate paragraphs assigning paragraph numbers.

C

ii.Prosecution witnesses shall be numbered as PW-1, PW-2etc, in seriatim. Similarly, defence witnesses shall benumbered as DW-1, DW-2, etc., in seriatim. The Courtwitnesses shall be numbered as CW-1, CW-2, etc, inDseriatim.

iii.The record of depositions shall indicate the date of the chiefexamination, the cross examination and re-examination.

iv.The Presiding Officers shall wherever necessary record theEdeposition in question and answer format.

v.Objections by either the prosecution or the defence counselshall be taken note of and reflected in the evidence anddecided immediately, in accordance with law, or, at thediscretion of the learned Judge, at the end of the depositionFof the witness in question.

vi.The name and number of the witness shall be clearly statedon any subsequent date, if the evidence is not concluded onthe date on which it begins.

8. EXHIBITING OF MATERIAL OBJECTS ANDGEVIDENCE

i.Prosecution exhibits shall be marked as Exhibit P-1, P-2etc in seriatim. Similarly, defence Exhibits shall be markedas Exhibit D-1, D-2, etc in seriatim. The Court exhibit shallbe marked as Exhibit C-1, C-2, etc in seriatim.

H

ii.To easily locate the witness through whom the documentAwas first introduced in evidence, the exhibit number shallfurther show the witness number of such witness after theExhibit number. If an exhibit is marked without proper proof,the same shall be indicated by showing in brackets (subjectto proof).

B

Explanation: If Prosecution witness no. 1 (PW1) introducesa document in evidence, that document shall be marked asExhibit P-1/PW1. If proper proof is not offered for thatdocument at the time when it is marked, it shall be markedas Exhibit P-1/PW1 (subject to proof). The Seconddocument introduced by PW1 will be Exhibit P-2/PW1.

C

iii.The Material objects shall be marked in seriatim as MO-1,MO-2 etc.

9. SUBSEQUENT REFERENCES TO ACCUSED,WITNESS, EXHIBITS AND MATERIAL OBJECTS

D

i.After framing of charges, the accused shall be referred toonly by their ranks in the array of accused in the chargeand not by their names or other references except at thestage of identification by the witness.

E

ii.After recording the deposition of witnesses, marking of theexhibits and material objects, while recording deposition ofother witnesses, the witnesses, exhibits and material objectsshall be referred by their numbers and not by names orother references.

F

iii.Where witness cited in the complaint or police report arenot examined, they shall be referred to by their names andthe numbers allotted to them in the complaint or police report.

10. REFERENCES TO STATEMENTS UNDER SECTION161 AND 164 CRPC:

G

i.During cross examination, the relevant portion of thestatements recorded under Section 161 Cr.PC used forcontradicting the respective witness shall be extracted. If itis not possible to extract the relevant part as aforesaid, thePresiding Officer, in his discretion, shall indicate specifically H

Athe opening and closing words of such relevant portion, whilerecording the deposition, through distinct marking.

ii.In such cases, where the relevant portion is not extracted,the portions only shall be distinctly marked as prosecutionor defence exhibit as the case may be, so that otherBinadmissible portions of the evidence are not part of therecord.

iii.In cases, where the relevant portion is not extracted, theadmissible portion shall be distinctly marked as prosecutionor defence exhibit as the case may be.

C

iv.The aforesaid rule applicable to recording of the statementsunder Section 161 shall mutatis mutandis apply tostatements recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.PC,whenever such portions of prior statements of living personsare used for contradiction/corroboration.

Dv.Omnibus marking of the entire statement under S. 161 and164 Cr.P.C shall not be done.

11. MARKING OF CONFESSIONAL STATEMENTS

The Presiding Officers shall ensure that only admissible portionEof Section 8 or Section 27 Indian Evidence Act, 1872 is marked andsuch portion alone is extracted on a separate sheet and marked andgiven an exhibit number.

CHAPTER IV: THE JUDGMENT

12. Every judgement shall contain the followingF

i.Start with a preface showing the names of parties as perFORM A to the Rules.

ii.A tabular statement as per FORM B to the Rules.

iii.An appendix giving the list of prosecution witnesses,Gdefence witnesses, Court witnesses, Prosecution Exhibits,Defence Exhibits and Court Exhibits and Material Objectsas per FORM C to the Rules.

13. In compliance with Section 354 and 355 Cr.PC, in all cases,the judgments shall contain:

H

i.the point or points for determination, AB

ii.the decision thereon, and

iii.the reasons for the decision

14. In case of conviction, the judgment shall separately indicatethe offence involved and the sentence awarded. In case there are multipleaccused, each of them shall be dealt with separately. In case of acquittaland if the accused is in confinement, a direction shall be given to set theaccused at liberty, unless such accused is in custody in any other case.

15. In the judgment the accused, witnesses, exhibits and materialobjects shall be referred to by their nomenclature or number and notonly by their names or otherwise. Wherever, there is a need to refer tothe accused or witnesses by their name, the number shall be indicatedwithin brackets.

C

16. The judgment shall be written in paragraphs and eachparagraph shall be numbered in seriatim. The Presiding Officers, may,in their discretion, organize the judgment into different sections.

D

CHAPTER V: MISCELLANEOUS

17. BAIL

i.The application for bail in non-bailable cases must ordinarilyEbe disposed off within a period of 3 to 7 days from the dateof first hearing. If the application is not disposed off withinsuch period, the Presiding Officer shall furnish reasonsthereof in the order itself. Copy of the order and the replyto the bail application or status report (by the police orprosecution) if any, shall be furnished to the accused and toFthe accused on the date of pronouncement of the orderitself.ii.The Presiding Officer may, in an appropriate case in itsdiscretion insist on a statement to be filed by the prosecutorin charge of the case.G

ii.The Presiding Officer may, in an appropriate case in itsdiscretion insist on a statement to be filed by the prosecutorin charge of the case.

18. SEPARATION OF PROSECUTORS ANDINVESTIGATORS

The State Governments shall appoint advocates, other than PublicProsecutors, to advise the Investigating Officer during investigation.

H

A19. DIRECTIONS FOR EXPEDITIOUS TRIAL

i.

In every enquiry or trial, the proceedings shall be held asexpeditiously as possible, and, in particular, when theexamination of witnesses has once begun, the same shallbe continued from day to day until all the witnesses inattendance have been examined, unless the court finds theadjournment of the same beyond the following day to benecessary for reasons to be recorded. (section 309 (1)Cr.PC.). For this purpose, at the commencement, andimmediately after framing charge, the court shall hold ascheduling hearing, to ascertain and fix consecutive datesfor recording of evidence, regard being had to whether thewitnesses are material, or eyewitnesses, or formal witnessesor are experts. The court then shall draw up a scheduleindicating the consecutive dates, when witnesses would beexamined; it is open to schedule recording of a set ofwitness’ depositions on one date, and on the next date, othersets, and so on. The court shall also, before commencementof trial, ascertain if the parties wish to carry out admissionof any document under Section 294, and permit them to doso, after which such consecutive dates for trial shall befixed.

B

C

D

E

ii.After the commencement of the trial, if the court finds itnecessary or advisable to postpone the commencement of,or adjourn, any inquiry or trial, it may, from time to time, forreasons to be recorded postpone or adjourn the same onsuch terms as it thinks fit, for such time as it considersreasonable. If witnesses are in attendance no adjournmentor postponement shall be granted, without examining them,except for special reasons to be recorded, in writing.(Section 309 (2) Cr.PC.).

F

iii.Sessions cases may be given precedence over all other workand no other work should be taken up on sessions daysuntil the sessions work for the day is completed. A Sessionscase once posted should not be postponed unless that isunavoidable, and once the trial has begun, it should proceed G

H

continuously from day today till it is completed. If for anyreason, a case has to be adjourned or postponed, intimationshould be given forthwith to both sides and immediate stepsbe taken to stop the witnesses and secure their presenceon the adjourned date.

Form A

Form B

Accused Details:

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

AFORM C

LIST OF PROSECUTION / DEFENCE / COURTWITNESSES

A. Prosecution

B

C

B. Defence Witnesses, if any;

D

E

C. Court Witnesses, if any;

LIST OF PROSECUTION/DEFENCE/COURT EXHIBITSFA. Prosecution:

A. Prosecution:

GB. DefenceH

IN RE: TO ISSUE CERTAIN GUIDELINES REGARDING INADEQUACIES ANDDEFICIENCIES IN CRIMINAL TRIALS v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

C. Court ExhibitsD. Material Objects:Nidhi JainProceedings disposed of.

Proceedings disposed of.

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H