SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Before:- S. Saghir Ahmad and M. Jagannadha Rao, JJ.

W.P. (C) 559 of 1994. D/d. 10.12.1998.

R.D. Upadhyay - Petitioner

Versus

State of A.P. & Ors - Respondents

Constitution of India, 1950 Article 32 Writ Direction - High Courts shall be required to furnish a list of all pending Criminal/district wise in different courts specifying offences to which they relate and if they are pending for more than five years as on 31.12.98, reason for not being disposed of speedily - High Courts also indicate whether existing courts are sufficient for speedy disposal of pending cases including trials and, if not, what are requirements for additional courts - State of U.P. to file a better affidavit with details of pending cases beyond five years not been given, they have also not specified offences for which cases mentioned in schedule appended to affidavit are pending - Various charts filed by the State of Punjab come to our notice that in State of Punjab, there are 140 under trial prisoners for offences under Sections 107/151 Criminal Procedure Code, Out of this 36 is released on bail and 104 is not released on bail and are in jail for more than 6 months - Prisoners to be released on bail on furnishing personal bonds to Chief Judicial Magistrates concerned and direction is effective in respect of other States also where under trials prisoners for offences under Sections 107/151 Criminal Procedure Code are in jail for more than 6 months.

[Paras 1, 2, 3 and 4]

ORDER

1. Notices on this petition shall be issued to all the High Courts returnable by 26.2.1999. The High Courts shall be required to furnish a list of all pending Criminal/district wise in different courts specifying the offences to which they relate and if they are pending for more than five years as on 31.12.98, the reason for not being disposed of speedily. The High Courts will also indicate whether the existing courts are sufficient for speedy disposal of the pending cases including trials and, if not, what are the requirements for the additional courts.

2. The affidavit filed by State of U.P. is highly unsatisfactory and does not give details as were required by this Court. Apart from the fact that the details of pending cases beyond five years have not been given, they have also not specified the offences for which the cases mentioned in the schedule appended to the affidavit are pending. We, therefore, direct the State of U.P. to file a better affidavit by 26.2.1999.

3. On a perusal of the various charts filed by the State of Punjab in response to the orders passed by this Court from time to time, it has come to our notice that in the State of Punjab, there are 140 under trial prisoners for offences under Sections 107/151 Criminal Procedure Code. Out of this 36 have been released on bail and 104 have not been released on bail and are in jail for more than 6 months.

4. We direct that these under prisoners shall be released on b ail on furnishing personal bonds to the Chief Judicial Magistrates concerned. This direction will be effective in respect of other States also where the under trials prisoners for offences under Sections 107/151 Criminal Procedure Code are in jail for more than 6 months.

5. List on 26.2.1999 before the Court of Hon'ble the Chief Justice as the problems relating to pendency of Courts, requirement of additional Courts, filling up of the existing vacancies at various levels including the High Courts can be effectively tackled in that Court.

.