Muktinarain Jha and Ors. v. State of Bihar
KRISHNA IYER, J. The s.oocial leave petition had been dismissed.
on an earlier occasion on the score that the petitioners had not surren
dered to judicial custody which is more or less a condition precedent
to seeking the leave of this Court to file an appeal. However, the
petitioners point out, in the present petition for restoration of S.L.P .,
that although they had offered their person and surrendered before the
Assistant Sessions Judge, Madhipure, requesting that they be remanded
to jail custody, the court declined to take them into custody for want
of receipt of judgment from the High Court. Prima facie, this appears
to be true in view of annexure A which is a copy of the application put
into that court. It is unfortunate that when High Courts deliver judg
ments confirming the conviction and sentence, there is a long delay in
communicating the fact of affirmation of the sentence to the trial courts.
j
(
(
{
,
. }
)
~.·
MUKTINARAIN v. BIHAR (Krishna Iyer,!.) 603
A sentence should not be delaye.d at least after it is confirmed by the
High Court but when this nappens on account ot the indifference of
the administrative side of the High Court in the mechanical process of
communication to the trial court it speaks badly of the management
side of our court system. We wish that more businesscJike procedures
in such matters were evolved so that the rule of law need not suffer a
new shock on account of messy-management of judicial business rectifi
able by a httle more promptitude and attention.
These observations have relevance to the present case because,
long after the judgment of the High Court and the sentences offering
to surrender, the court's sentence has not started to operate and the
S.L.P. in this Court has had to be dismissed-things which should not
have and could not have happened if the High Court's administrative
side had been less indifferent.
The petition is allowed and the S.L.P. will be posted three weeks
later. Time to surrender ten days. Meanwhile communication of
this order, with some administrative celerity, will be made both to the
High Court and to the trial court. (The practice direction is to be
reported).
S.R. Petition allowed.
13-1146 SCI/76