- (1.) Perused the report of the Registrar (Judicial) dated 26.09.2006. The special leave petition was filed on 10.06.2004, which was sent by one Nathu @ Parasram, who is in custody. He had sent a copy of the judgment passed by the High Court. The record was, however, put up on 04.09.2006.
(2.) It is in the aforementioned premise that an inquiry was directed to be conducted. The Registrar (Judicial), in his report, inter alia, stated that the office had sent for the records of the courts below which caused delay.
(3.) Our attention in this behalf has been drawn to Order XXI Rule 8 of the Supreme Court Rules, 1966, relevant portion whereof is in the following terms : "(1) If the petitioner is in jail and is not represented by an advocate on record he may present his petition for special leave to appeal together with the certified copy of the Judgment and any written argument which he may desire to advance to the officer-in-charge of the jail, who shall forthwith forward the same to the Registrar of this Court. Upon receipt of the said petition, the Registrar of the Court shall, whenever necessary call, from the proper officer of the Court or the Tribunal appealed from, the relevant documents for determination of the petition for special leave to appeal. (2) As soon as all necessary documents are available the Registrar shall, assign an Advocate from a panel of amicus curiae and thereafter place the petition and complete documents for hearing before the Court. The fee of the advocate so engaged shall be Rs.250/- upto the admission stage and a lump sum not exceeding Rs.500/- for the hearing of the appeal arising therefrom, as may be fixed by the Bench hearing the appeal, and in an appropriate case, the Bench hearing the case may for the reasons to be recorded in writing, sanction payment of a lump sum not exceeding Rs.750/-.";