Uttarakhand High Court
Manjeet vs State Of Uttarakhand on 24 July, 2020
Author: Ravindra Maithani
Bench: Ravindra Maithani
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
First Bail Application No. 2600 of 2019
Manjeet ...Applicant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand ....Opposite party
Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J.
Mr. Vaibhav Singh Chauhan, Advocate for the applicant.
Mr. G.S. Sandhu, GA and Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, AGA for the State.
This matter is taken up and heard through Video Conferencing.
2. In the instant case, the state was requested to file counter affidavit on 27.11.2019 but, for almost six months the state failed to file the counter affidavit. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hussain and Another Vs. Union Of India, (2017) 5 SCC 702, held that High Courts should make all efforts to decide as far as possible the bail application within one month. In this backdrop, on 17.06.2020, this Court explored a possibility of laying down a Standard Operating Procedure for filing counter affidavit, without calling the Investigating Officer in the High Court. On the next date i.e. 22.06.2020, the Court constituted a Committee to prepare a blueprint on the subject comprising of the following members:-
"(i) Mr. Ritesh Kumar Shrivastava, Additional Secretary Law cum Additional L.R.
(ii) Mr. Arvind Kumar Dhadichi, Scientist-F, Uttarakhand State Unit Dehradun.
(iii) A nominee of Principal Secretary, Home, Government of Uttarakhand (preferably an I.P.S officer having experience in such matters).
(iv) Mr. Pratiroop Pandey Assistant Government Advocate."2
3. The Committee submitted its report, on which, on 14.07.2020, the Court sought inputs from the Principal Secretary (Home) as well as the Secretary, Law-cum-LR.
4. The inputs have been received. The matter has been further discussed in the Court today, joined by Mr. Nitesh Jha, Secretary (Home), State of Uttarakhand, Mr. Prem Singh Khimal, Secretary Law and L.R. State of Uttarakhand, Mr. Rajiv Kumar Shrivastava Additional Secretary Law-cum-Additional L.R., Dr. K. Narayan, Scientist-G and State Information Officer Uttarakhand, State Unit Dehradun, Mr. Arvind Kumar Dhadichi, Scientist-F, Uttarakhand State Unit Dehradun, Mr. Senthil Avoodai K. Raj S, Senior Superintendent of Police, Haridwar, Mr G.S. Sandhu, Government Advocate and Mr. Pratiroop Pandey Assistant Government Advocate.
5. The Committee examined the issue and while considering the challenges suggested possible solutions. It has outlined the Standard Operating Procedure and different stages of its implementation (First Phase and Second Phase).
6. At the outset, the Court records its appreciation for the efforts made by the Committee in preparing the report within the given time. This Court hopes that if examined and implemented sincerely, perhaps, the desired results may be achieved.
7. In this age of information and communication technology, calling an Investigating Officer just for perusal of the documents and discussion for filing counter affidavit can be termed as primitive way of functioning. Calling an IO just for discussion for filing counter-affidavit may definitely cause loss of human as well as financial resources. An IO may be more required at his workplace in the field. There are a number of questions that are before this Court, which are as follows:
(i) Can we not save these resources?3
(ii) Why documents cannot be transmitted online in a secured navigation mode with password secured access?
(iii) Why an IO cannot be communicated online by Government Advocate, who considers it necessary to consult him for filing counter affidavit?
(iv) Why there cannot be any portal with chat-
box facility so that every discussion may also be permanently preserved?
(v) Cannot the system fix the timelines for each job?
(vi) Cannot there be a system that in case required action is not taken on time, an auto- generated message be sent to both, the person committing the default and his superior officer, so that the working may be monitored and reviewed?
(vii) In case of subsequent default(s), can't it be considered to proceed departmentally against the erring public servant?
(viii) Should not there be a mechanism at the State Government level to monitor its working in the High Court in terms of filing documents, affidavits, etc on time?
8. During discussion the officers from NIC would inform that a portal for this purpose may be made functional by them on or before 15.08.2020. It is really encouraging. It is another ray of hope in eliminating delay and infusing transparency in the system.
9. During discussion today, reference has been made to Inter-operable Criminal Justice System (iCJS). E-courts project had been launched long back for computerisation of the Courts. Crime and Criminal Tracking Network and Systems (CCTNS) is also a 4 Mission Mode Project under the National e-Governance Plan (NeGP) of Govt. of India. ICJS aims to integrate the CCTN project with the e-courts and e-prisons databases as well as other institutions which help the criminal justice system such as forensics, prosecution and juvenile homes in a phased manner. Seamless flow of data in Court functioning is the basic aim to ensure speed and transparency which would ultimately enhance the overall efficiency of the judicial system.
10. A point that should be kept in mind while developing a new portal is that it should be compatible logistically along with the other pre existing portals made for the efficient functioning of the judicial system.
11. The Principal Secretary (Home) assures the Court that he would see that this is done on or before 09.11.2020.
12. This Court leaves it to the Principal Secretary (Home), who may in consultation with the members of the committee as well as the Secretary, Law-cum-LR and Dr. K. Narayanan, Scientist-G and State Information Officer, State Unit Dehradun, may put a mechanism in place so that without further burdening the Investigating Officer, counter affidavit may be filed well on time in the High Court with the help of modern information and communication tools.
13. This Court would not further monitor this aspect, but, would only like to remind all that, if this is done, perhaps, it would be another step in the direction of fulfilling the promise, as given under Article 21 of the Constitution of India for ensuring speedy justice.
14. Let a copy of this order be forwarded to Secretary (Home), State of Uttarakhand, Secretary Law and L.R. State of Uttarakhand, Additional Secretary Law-cum-Additional L.R., 5 Scientist-G and State Information Officer Uttarakhand, State Unit Dehradun and all the members of the committee through e-mail also.
15. List this matter on the date already fixed i.e. 04.08.2020 for hearing on bail application.
(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 24.07.2020 Jitendra