Judgment

S. K. Das, J.: This is an appeal by special leave, and it presents some unusual features. The short facts are these. The Additional Sessions Judge of Hardoi in the State of Uttar Pradesh tried Zafar Ali Khan and three other persons on charges under Ss. 452 and 307 read with S. 34,Indian Penal Code. The case against the aforesaid accused persons started on a first information report lodged at a police station called Shahabad, purporting to have been so lodged at about 3.30 a.m. by one Farasat Ali Khan on the night between the 7th and 8th November, 1958. The case was investigated by one Mohammad Naim who was then the Station Officer of Shahabad police station. The learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted the accused persons though he found, on the evidence given in the case, that it was more probable that the first information was lodged at the police station at about 7 or 8 a.m. rather than at 3.30. a.m. From the conviction and sentences passed by the Additional Sessions Judges there was an appeal to the High Court at Allahabad (Lucknow Bench). This appeal was heard by Mulla, J. He found that Mohammad Naim had dressed up a totally unbelievable case which destroyed the evidentiary value of the statements of Farasat Ali and his wife. Ummati Begum, two of principal witnesses for the prosecution. The learned Judge allowed the appeal and set aside the conviction and sentences of the four appellants before him. The learned Judge further observed in his judgment:

"There is ample evidence to prove that first information report in this case was not lodged at 3.30 a. m. This is also the finding of trial court. The time noted in the first information report is, therefore, a fictitious time and a fabrication has been made in the public records. I, therefore, direct the office to issue a notice to Sri Mohammad Naim as to why a complaint should not be instituted against him by this court under S. 195 I. P. Code.

2. In pursuance of the direction given by the learned Judge, Mohammad Naim was given a notice to show cause why a complaint for an offence under S. 195 Indian Penal Code should not be made against him for fabricating the first information report in respect of the time at which it was said to have been lodged. Mohammad Naim appeared before the learned Judged and threw himself at the mercy of the court and asked for forgiveness. The learned Judge dealt with the matter in Cr. Misc. Case No. 87 of 1961. He accepted the apology of Mohammad Naim, but said that he did so very hesitatingly. In the course of his order accepting the apology of Mohammad Naim be made certain observations, We may now quote those observations:

"I issued the notice because I want to clean the public administration as far as possible but an individual s efforts cannot go very far. If I had felt that with my lone efforts I could have cleaned this augean stable, which is the police force, I would not have hesitated to wage this war single-handed. I am on the verge of retirement and taking such steps for two months or three months more would not make any difference to the constitution and the character of the police force ...... Somehow the police force in general, barring few exceptions; seems to have come to the conclusion that crime cannot be investigated and security cannot be preserved by following the law and this can only be achieved by breaking or circumventing the law. At least the traditions of a hundred years indicate that this is what they believe. If this belief is not rooted out of their minds, there is hardly any chance of improvement......I say it with all sense of responsibility that there is not a single lawless group in the whole of the country whose record of crime comes anywhere near the record of that organised unit which is known as the Indian Police Force. If the Police force must be manned by officers like Mohammad Naim then it is better that we tear up our Constitution, forget all about democracy and the rights of citizens and change