- (1.) WE have heard learned Govt. Advocate Sri V. S. Misra and learned AGA Sri A. K. Sand and have perused the counter-affidavit dated 15-1-2007 filed on behalf of the Home Secretary, U. P. and the counter- affidavit dated 16-1-2007 sworn by SP, CBCID, Union of India on behalf of DG (CBCID), Lucknow. WE have also perused the report dated 16-1-2007 submitted by the Registrar General.
(2.) AT the outset we must express our pain and anguish at the desultory compliance of our orders by the State Government. In paragraph 10 of the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the Home Secretary it is mentioned that out of 1201 accused persons involved in 276 cases sanctions are required from the Union of India in cases relating to 225 accused persons and sanctions are needed from the State Home Department in respect of 976 accused persons who belong to the police force or other public service. Out of the said 976 accused persons no case for grant of sanction was found against three accused persons and sanction order was only issued against 9 accused persons. This is a shocking figure, considering that by our order dated 15-9-2006 we had directed that at least 2/3rd of the total number of wanted accused should be arrested within 8 weeks. Again by our order dated 16-11-2006 we had directed the Principal Secretary (Home) to ensure that within 2 months the applications for sanction should be disposed of at the appropriate level by the State Government or the department concerned, (as applicable), but to our dismay we note that only in the case of 12 persons sanction matters have been disposed of after 16-11-2006, which is less than 1% of the total number of 1201 accused persons whose sanctions are sought. It is mentioned in paragraph 8 of the counter-affidavit filed by the CBCID that out of 1559 accused persons who could not be arrested prior to 15-11-2006, 243 persons have either been arrested or surrendered or had been accounted for otherwise and out of the remaining 1316 persons the principal reason why a large number of persons could not be arrested is because of want of sanction from the State Government or the concerned department. From this appears that either the State is indifferent to the fact whether charge-sheeted public servants be arrested or it is colluding with them, which casts a grave adverse reflection in the intention of the State to maintain law and order and to see that action is taken against prima facie culpable public servants. We, therefore, have no option now but to direct the Principal Secretary (Home), U. P. to be personally present before this Court to submit his explanation alongwith an affidavit for this inexcusable laxity in the matter. We also direct the Principal Secretary (Home) to inform this Court about the efforts made to obtain sanctions in the said cases after our orders of today and also to give us the break-up of all pending cases where the matters have been referred for sanction for periods of 5 years and more, 1 to 5 years and less than 1 year (which have not been furnished in the State's counter-affidavit dated 15-1- 2007 ). We also direct that the Union of India should also be given notice of this order through Dr. Ashok Nigam, Additional Solicitor General, and the State Government should provide the list of the cases of 225 accused persons where the sanctions are required from the Union of India. We direct the Union of India to dispose of the pending matters as far as possible where sanctions are sought by the next date of listing (20-2-2007), or at least to consider the cases for sanction of 2/3rd or more of the accused persons whose sanction is required at their level by the next date, and also to provide a break-up of the existing pending cases for sanction for periods of 5 years and more, 1 to 5 years, and less than one year.
(3.) WE also expect that the CBCID shall take stringent measures to conclude the investigations and to effect the arrests of the concerned accused persons who remain to be arrested or in whose cases investigations are still pending, as per our earlier orders dated 24-5-2006, 21-8-2006 and 16-11-2006 in the cases in which there is no legal impediment. The progress report shall be submitted by the DGP (CBCID) about the conclusion of investigations and arrests and the remaining impediments on the next date of listing. We are also not satisfied with the circular letters dated 10- 1-2007 and 12-1-2007 (Annexures SA1 and SA2) issued by the State Government to the SSPs/sps of all districts as the circular dated 10-1-2007 unlike the order of the DG (CBCID) dated 8-9-2006 merely refers to the Government Order dated 5-9- 1995 and the letter of the DG dated 8-9-2006 without emphasizing the ingredients or mentioning the criteria for selecting appropriate cases for transfer of investigation to the CB CID, as have been clarified in our orders dated 16-11-2006, 15-9-2006, 21-8-2006 and 24-5-2006 that in accordance with the Division Bench decisions of this Court in Smt. Ramwati and Ors. v. State of U. P. , 2001 (1) JIC 845 (All) : 2001 (42) ACC 751, Bhopal and Ors. v. State and Ors. , 1997 JIC 95 (All) : 1997 (34) ACC 371 etc. that based on relevant Government orders, transfer of investigation to the CBCID should only be made if (1) the crime is so complicated and involved that is not possible for the local police to properly investigate the crime, (2) the crime has international or inter- State or inter divisional ramifications, (3) the local conditions are such due to which it has become difficult for the local civil police to investigate the case fairly, and (4) such conditions have arisen due to which a doubt is created in the mind of the general public that the local police is not investigating the matter fairly. Also the circular should emphasize that transfers of investigations from the local police to the CBCID are not to be effected in a routine manner simply to please political functionaries by the district level officers mechanically giving "no Objection" opinions but that the transfer are only to be effected after the district level competent officers exercises their independent mind and give reasons in accordance with Government Order dated 5-9-2005 and the DGP's circular dated 8-9- 2006, and as clearly mandated in the present and abovementioned earlier orders.;