Judgment :

Dr. Arijit Pasayat, J.

1.1. Challenge in this appeal is to the order passed by a learned Single Judge of Madhya Pradesh High Court, Indore Bench, which gave certain directions to the State Government in the matter of identification of prisoners and methodology for investigation. The respondent No.1 had filed an application for grant of bail in terms of Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short the `Code). During hearing of the petition the respondent No.1 who was the applicant before the High Court stated that the petition has become infructuous. Therefore, he did not want to press the same. The High Court held that even though the petition had become infructuous certain directions were necessary to be given to the concerned authorities.

2.2. The stand before the High Court by the appellant-State was that there were not many cases where impersonation was involved and therefore the desirability of taking the photographs in all cases would be an additional burden on the State Exchequer. It was pointed out that Sections 4, 5 & 6 of the Identification of Prisoners Act, 1920 (in short the `Prisoners Act) provided sufficient guidelines. Direction was given to the State about affixing the photographs of the accused persons as well as the witness. There is a likelihood of a grievance being made that the photographs were shown to the accused before the Test Identification Parade. The High Court was however of the view that at the time of filing charge sheet, the photographs of the witnesses as well as the accused persons should be given to avoid impersonation and to curb delay due to non-service of summons and warrants in criminal trials.

3.3. The High Court noted that though Section 170(2) of the Code provides for taking surety bonds from the accused persons for their appearance in court at the time when the charge sheet is filed or when the accused is forwarded to Magistrate, this is not sufficient safeguard in cases of impersonation. Accordingly the following directions were given:

"1. That the State shall make suitable amendments in the Police Regulations about taking and filing photographs of the complainant material witnesses and accused persons alongwith the charge sheet in all criminal cases, sessions trials, except in minor/petty offences and non-cognizable offence.

1.2. In a case where there is no dispute of identification of the accused, the photograph of such person should invariably be taken at the time of arrest of any person for crime, while noting his identification marks to avoid any set back on the prosecution case regarding identification and when identification is doubtful then the photograph should be taken at the time of filing charge sheet.

2.3. In all criminal cases and sessions trials, except in non-cognizable and minor/petty offences, at the time of filing of the challan/charge sheet the State should also file the photographs of complainant, material witnesses and all the accused persons and the same should be part of the papers of the trial. The State may also retain copy of photographs with the case diary or at the police station for the purposes of service of summons and warrants for arresting the absconding accused persons.

3.4. The photographs should be of enough number to show the accused clearly from his front pose and may include a photograph of the accused in standing position.

4.5. The photographs of the accused persons should be duly authenticated by the concerned officer, who arrested the accused persons.

5.6. In all sessions trials and criminal cases when warrants of arrest are issued the photographs and mark of identification should be checked with the accused.

6.7. In all sessions trials and criminal cases at the time of arrest the identity of the accused should be properly verified and care should be taken to ascertain his correct name and address.

8. The officer arresting the accused must certify the photographs and the particulars of his identity with a certifica