Following High Court Directions, UP Police To Email Instructions To Govt Advocates In Criminal Cases; 'Pairokar' System To End

This move is in strict compliance with the High Court's directions issued on December 9.

A bench of Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal had issued the direction, noting that under the current manual system, there are significant delays in receiving instructions from police stations in criminal matters.

For context, the bench was apprised that as per the prevailing practice, once a bail notice is received, it is handed to the district police 'Pairokar' who visits the Government Advocate's office daily.

Further, the Pairokar then travels to the district SP office, which distributes the notice to the relevant police station. The IO then obtains the case diary or, if the charge sheet hasn't been filed, prepares copies and returns them via the Pairokar to the High Court.

Justice Deshwal noted that since the matter of bail relates to the liberty of a person, this manual cycle is "nothing but a wastage of time of police personnel and public money”.

These observations were made by the bench while hearing a bail petition filed by Ratvar Singh, an accused booked in an attemot to murder case. During the hearing, the HC held a comprehensive dialogue with senior technical and police officials of the state regarding delays and the implementation of the Interoperable Criminal Justice System (ICJS).

Read more about the HC's order and observations here : Allahabad High Court Directs UP Police To Send Instructions By E-mail In Criminal Cases, Calls For Immediate ICJS Integration

Subsequently, on December 18, the Court was apprised of the circular issued by the DGP (dated December 17) by which all the district police chiefs have been directed that the instructions in the bail matter as well as in other criminal matters should be sent through electronic mode on the ID of the Joint Director (Prosecution) High Court instead of sending the same through pairokar.

The Court explicitly appreciated Shashi Kant Sharma, DDG, NIC, Delhi, for his "valuable contribution not only in the present case but also in several other cases in rolling out 'E-Summon' Project and 'BOMS (Bail Order Management System)' in district courts of U.P. as well as implementation of ICJS in coordination with NIC, Allahabad High Court unit."

Similarly, the Bench commended Markandey Srivastava, Joint Director (IT), NIC, Allahabad High Court, for his consistent contribution and cooperation with the High Court's CPC and Technical ADJ for the effective implementation of the NSTEP Project and BOMS in Uttar Pradesh.

On the merits of the case, the Court perused the FIR and statements of the injured and observed that while a general allegation had been made against the applicant and co-accused for beating the first informant, the injury reports of the injured persons show that all the injuries are simple in nature.

The State opposed the bail, but could not dispute the nature of the injuries.

Thus, considering that the applicant had been languishing in jail since October 12, 2025, and taking into account the overcrowded jails and heavy pendency of criminal cases before trial courts, the Bench opined that the applicant was entitled to bail.