Will the manual “advocate” system be abolished? Allahabad High Court order: Send bail instructions via email, implement ICJS immediately
The Allahabad High Court has taken a major step towards reforming the criminal justice system in Uttar Pradesh. The court has termed the decades-old manual “parokār” system for seeking police instructions in bail matters as a waste of time and government funds. The court has ordered the Director General of Police (DGP) to send future instructions related to bail petitions to the Joint Director (Prosecution) via email. Additionally, the court has directed the state government to appoint an IPS officer as the nodal officer for the effective implementation of the Interoperable Criminal Justice System (ICJS).
A bench of Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deswal issued these important directions while hearing the case of Ratwar Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh. The Court observed that despite the existence of the ICJS project since 2009 and technological advancements, the process for obtaining instructions from the police in the High Court is still outdated and slow, leading to delays in justice.
Background of the case
The matter arose during the hearing of a bail application, when the Public Prosecutor (AGA) informed the court that despite the service of notice, instructions had not been received from the concerned police station. To understand the reasons for this delay, the court summoned the Joint Director (Prosecution), Allahabad High Court.
The Joint Director informed the court that the process is currently entirely manual. Upon receipt of a bail notice at the public prosecutor’s office, it is handed over to the district police counsel, who then physically carries it to the district police office. From there, it is sent to the police station, where the investigating officer (I.O.) prepares the case diary or notes, and then, through the same lengthy process, the instructions reach the High Court through the counsel.
In its November 20, 2025, order, the court noted that this process takes more than two weeks, whereas the same information can be obtained in a matter of hours through the ICJS portal. The court expressed displeasure that while district courts have access to CCTNS, the High Court Public Prosecutor’s Office does not have direct access to the police portal or criminal history (DCRB/SCRB).
Arguments and explanations presented in court
In compliance with the court order, senior officials appeared and presented their views through video conferencing:
Shri Naveen Arora, Additional Director General of Police (Technical), UP: He informed the Court that under the ICJS project
- The nodal agency for this is the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) and the technical partner is the NIC. He explained that the police’s role is only to assist. He assured that “ICJS-2.0 will be launched within a few months,” which will solve the problems of data access.
- Shri Shashi Kant Sharma, Deputy Director General, NIC, New Delhi: He suggested that till ICJS 2.0 is fully implemented, as an alternative arrangement, Joint Director (Prosecution) may be given access to the required data.
- Shri P.C. Meena, Director General of Prisons, UP: He informed that District Jail Superintendents have been directed to enter the prisoners on the e-Prison portal so that release orders can be sent electronically.
The Joint Director (Prosecution) explained his helplessness to the court and said that there is a huge shortage of staff in his office and only five people are handling the entire work.
High Court’s analysis and comments
Justice Deswal expressed deep concern over the slow pace of the ICJS project. The Court remarked that “thousands of crores of rupees have been earmarked for this project and more than 16 years have passed, but the project is still moving at a slow pace.”
The Court stated that the purpose of the ICJS is to implement the principle of “one data, one entry.” The Court also underlined that the non-implementation of the ICJS violates specific legal provisions:
- Gangster Act: Under Rule 5 of the UP Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Rules, 2021, it is mandatory to upload the gang chart on ICJS and CCTNS, which is not being done at present.
BNSS: Rule 31(3) of the Indian Civil Defence Code (BNSS) Rules, 2024 provides for service of summons through the ICJS, which is currently barred.
The court termed the manual process of sending instructions through advocates as “nothing but a waste of police personnel’s time and public money”.
High Court’s decision and instructions
The Court issued the following directions to streamline the bail process and make the ICJS effective:
- Appointment of Nodal IPS Officer: The Court directed the Chief Secretary, UP to nominate Shri Mohammad Irfan Ansari (IPS), who is already serving as the Nodal Officer in the High Court, or any other suitable IPS officer as the Nodal Officer for data integration on the ICJS platform.
Instructions through Email: The Director General of Police (DGP), UP was directed to issue necessary orders to send the instructions in bail and criminal matters through electronic mode to the Joint Director (Prosecution) on his email ID (jdhcprosecutionah-UP@nic.in) instead of the manual advocate system.
Staffing: The Chief Secretary was directed to provide adequate staff to the office of the Joint Director (Prosecution) to ensure proper implementation of the ICJS project.
Direction to NCRB: The Director General, NCRB, New Delhi was directed to take immediate steps for effective implementation of the ICJS project in UP.
The Court appreciated the assistance provided by Mr. Naveen Arora, Mr. Shashi Kant Sharma, and Mr. P.C. Meena. The Court fixed December 18, 2025, for hearing the main bail application.
Case Details:
- Case Title: Ratwar Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh
- Case Number: Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 41021 of 2025
- Judge: Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deswal
- Counsel for the applicant: Saurabh Pandey
- Counsel for the Respondent: Akhilesh Kumar Yadav, G.A.
