Report No. 14
7. In exercise of the discretion vested in the Chairman of the Commission to co-opt one or two practising lawyers of a State in order to assist the Commission's inquires in that State, the Chairman co-opted two members in each of the States visited by us except Madras where only one member was co-opted. The names of the members co-opted are given below:
Uttar Pradesh (Allahabad)
(1) Shri Jagdish Swaroop, Advocate, Allahabad.
(2) Shri Kirpa Narain, Advocate, Agra.
(1) Shri K.V. Suryanarayana Iyer, Advocate-General of Kerala, Ernakulam.
(2) Shri K.P. Abraham, Advocate, Ernakulam.
(1) Shri A.R. Somanatha Iyer, Advocate, Bangalore, (now Judge Mysore High Court).
(2) Shri N.K. Dixit, Advocate,
Dharwar, Madras (Madras)*
(1) Shri S.V. Gopalakrishnan, Advocate, Tinnevelly.
Andhra Pradesh (Hyderabad)**
(1) Shri A. Ramaswamy Iyengar, Advocate, Secunderabad.
(2) Shri M. S. Ramachandra Rao, Advocate, Secunderabad.
West Bengal (Calcutta)+
(1) Shri S.M. Bose, Advocate-General, West Bengal, Calcutta.
(2) Shri Atul Chandra Gupta, Advocate, Calcutta
(1) Shri B. Jagannadha Rao, Advocate, Berhampur.
(2) Shri B. Mahapatra, Advocate-General, Cuttack.
(1) Shri Debeshwar Sarma, Advocate, Jorhat.
(2) Shri S.K. Ghosh, Advocate, Gauhati.
(1) Shri R.A. Jahagirdar, Advocate, Bombay.
(2) Shri V.R. Dholakia, Advocate, Ahmedabad.
(1) Shri C.L. Agarwal, Advocate, Jaipur,
(2) Shri Chand Mal Lodha, Advocate, Jodhpur.
(1) Shri A.N. Grover, Advocate, Chandigarh (now Judge, Punjab High Court).
(2) Shri G.D. Sehgal, Advocate, Jullundur.
Madhya Pradesh ,(Jabalpur)
(1) Shri K.A. Chitale, Advocate, Indore, (Madhya Pradesh).
*(2) Shri M. Adhikari, Advocate-General, Madhya Pradesh, Jabalpur.
(1) Shri Aghore Nath Banerjee, Advocate, Monghyer (Bihar).
(2) Shri Lalnarayan Sinha, Advocate, Bihar High Court, Patna.
*. Shri V.K.T. Chari, a member of the Statute Revision Section attending section's sittings at Madras.
**. Shri D. Narasa Raju, a member of the Statute Revision Section attended the First Section's sittings at Hyderabad.
+. Dr. N.C. Sen Gupta, a member of the Statute Revision Section attended the First Section's sittings at Calcutta.
++ Shri N.A. Palkivala a member of the Statute Revision Section attended the first Section's setting at Bombay.
*. Was unable to attend the sittings of the Commission.
8. Before commencing our tour we requested all the High Courts and the State Governments to suggest the names of witnesses of several Categories, such as, (1) judicial officers, (2) representatives of Bar Associations, (3) representatives of the State Governments, (4) Heads of the police departments, (5) Chairman of the Public Service Commissions, (6) University teachers of law, (7) Persons experienced in the working of Village Panchayat Courts, (8) representatives of Legal Aid organisations and (9) individual lawyers.
The selection of the witnesses to be examined in each State was made from the lists supplied to us by the High Courts and the State Governments. In addition, publicity in the press was given to the visits of the Commission to the headquarters of the High Courts, so that, in addition to the witnesses proposed by the High Courts and the State Governments, we were also able to obtain in each State the assistance of several other witnesses who volunteered to place before us their views on the problems in which they were particularly interested.
9. In December, 1956 the first section of the Commission commenced its tours of the headquarters of all the State High Courts for the purpose of recording evidence of witnesses whose opinion could be helpful in our task. We examined in all 473 witnesses whose names are given in Appendix II. The sittings of the Commission and the places visited are shown below:
|Place||Sittings commenced||Sittings closed||No. of witnesses examined|
*. Witnesses from Himachal Pradesh are examined at Chandigarh.
We generally held our sittings at the centres we visited in public. Occasionally, however, it was found necessary to take the evidence of some witnesses in camera. The Commission had also the advantage of informal discussions with all the Chief Justices and a certain number of judges of the High Courts on the various problems raised in the Questionnaire.
10. From the 2nd January to the 7th January, 1958 the First Section again met in New Delhi in a series of meetings in which conclusions were reached as to recommendations to be made to Government. These conclusions and recommendations were decided upon finally in the combined meetings of both the Sections of the Commission held in New Delhi on the 25th and 26th January, 1958.
11. A draft Report prepared in the light of the conclusions was discussed at a meeting of the full Commission in New Delhi on the 23rd August-and the Report as finally settled and approved was signed at a meeting on the 26th September, 1958.
12. We cannot conclude without expressing our warm and sincere thanks to the High Courts, the representatives of State Governments and to the large number of individuals and associations who at the expense of much time and labour sent us detailed and elaborate replies to the questionnaire and submitted memoranda on various topics relating to the administration of justice. We would also express our deep gratitude to the State High Courts and their ministerial officers for the valuable co-operation and assistance given to us during our visits to each State and to the State Governments for the excellent arrangements made by them for our accommodation and comfort and for the staff which accompanied us.