- (1.) IMTIYAZ Murtaza and Amar Saran, JJ. We have heard Shri Sanjeev Kumar Yadav, learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate.
(2.) IN pursuance of the order of this Court dated 21-8-2006, wherein we have issued directions (a) for taking immediate steps for arrest of the accused, who are wanted in grave cognizable cases for long period of time including cases under Sections 302, 307, 364, 364-A IPC etc. by the CB CID; (b) restraining the future transfer of investigation to the CB CID in a routine manner or at the directions of the Hon'ble Chief Minister or other authorities except in accordance with the Government Orders and the decision of this Court; and (c) ensuring that the transfer order and the official report recommending the same shall mention the reasons and rules/government Orders for the transfer to the CBCID a counter- affidavit has been filed by the Under Secretary (Home) dated 11-9-2006 indicating the steps taken for complying with our direction. It is gratifying to note that the Secretary (Home) has issued directions on 30-8-2006 to the subordinate secretaries in the Home Department and the Director General of Police to comply with our aforesaid directions. The Director General of Police had also issued an order dated 8-9-2006 to all the S. S. Ps. /s. Ps. of the districts with copies to Director General, CBCID, Additional Director General of Police (Railways), all the Zonal Inspectors General of Police and all regional Deputy Inspectors General of Police, relying on the Government Orders dated 5-9-1995, 26-7-2006 for strict compliance of our order dated 21-8-2006. In the said D. O. letter the D. G. P. had observed that when opinion is sought from the officers posted in the districts whether a transfer to the CBCID would be justified, vague replies without reasons are received that simply mention that the concerned officer has no objection if the case is transferred to the CBCID. Henceforth, it would be necessary that in their opinions, they must mention the reasons and details as to why the transfer to the CBCID would be justified in the circumstances, having regard to (a) the fact that the crime is so complicated that it could not be properly investigated by the local police; (b) the crime has inter-state or inter-divisional ramifications; (c) the local conditions are such due to which it has become difficult for the civil police to investigate the case fairly; and (d) the local public has a doubt that independent investigation will not be conducted by the local police.
(3.) THE said D. O. letter also highlights the directions issued by this Court vide order dated 21-8-2006 for taking steps for the immediate arrest of the accused specially where they are involved in grave cognizable cases such as under Sections 302, 307, 364, 364-A IPC, etc. If the accused have not been arrested in such grave cases, the reasons for the situation must be disclosed. THE CBCID must write to the concerned districts/police stations for the arrest of the wanted accused and the arrest must then be effected expeditiously and that the CBCID must be duly informed after compliance with the request. However, this Court ruefully notes that apart from issuing the aforesaid order/d. O. letter, significant steps have still not been taken still for effecting the arrests of wanted accused in any substantial manner, in compliance with our earlier directions. It is mentioned in the letter dated 8-9-2006 sent by the D. G. P to the Special Secretary (Home) (Annexure CA-1) that arrest of 1918 wanted accused is still pending. According to an annexure to the first counter-affidavit filed by the Under Secretary (Home) sworn on 17-8-2006, out of the 1918 cases, 515 accused had not been arrested in cases which were more than 10 years old, 606 accused in cases 10-5 years old, 597 accused in cases 5-3 years old, 300 accused in cases 3-1 years old and 200 accused in cases less than one year old. It is further mentioned in paragraph 6 of the counter-affidavit of the Under Secretary (Home), Lucknow dated 11-9-2006 that after the High Court's order, only 78 wanted persons have been arrested. This constitutes a meager 4% of the total number of wanted accused and is merely the tip of the iceberg.;