K. MURALI SHANKAR, J.

1. The Criminal Original Petition has been filed invoking Section 528 BNSS seeking orders to call for the records pertaining to the FIR in Crime No.131 of 2024 dated 27.03.2024 on the file of the first respondent and quash the same.

2. It is pertinent to mention that the petitioner has earlier filed a petition in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.6334 of 2024 for quashing the FIR in Crime No.131 of 2024 and this Court, recording the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) that final report has already been filed before the Court concerned, closed the petition by giving liberty to the petitioner to challenge the charge sheet.

3. When the present criminal original petition was taken up for hearing, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that since final report was not filed and the case was not taken on file, the petitioner was constrained to file the present criminal original petition again for quashing the FIR. At that juncture, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) submitted that final report came to be filed through e-filing (No.CC202400067) on 22.04.2024. Considering the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that though the occurrence was happened on 23.06.2020 and FIR came to be registered on 27.03.2024 for the alleged offences under Sections 170, 417 and 419 of IPC, they have not filed the final report till then, this Court directed the respondent police to file final report, if not filed earlier. Considering the situation prevailing then, this Court was constrained to observe and issue directions vide order dated 30.09.2024 and the same as follows:- ?…..

7. I have encountered several cases in my current Portfolio where prosecutors claimed that the concerned police have filed charge sheets / final reports before the Judicial Magistrate Courts / Sessions Court through e-filing, dating back to the period between last week and last year. However, this Court is uncertain whether these charge sheets / final reports are being unnecessarily delayed without being taken on file for an extended period.

8. I requested reports from some Courts whether charge sheet / final report was submitted as stated by the police and if so, the reasons for not taking the cases on file. The reports revealed that although final reports was submitted, memos were issued to rectify the defects and despite reminders, there was no response and hence, they were not in a position to take the cases on file.

9. To ensure accountability from both the police and the Court, both were directed to follow the e-filing system for submitting charge sheets / final reports without any deviation. Unfortunately, the system is not functioning properly, with both sides blaming each other. To determine who is at fault and to improve the system-s efficiency, it is essential to request particulars from both the sides. Therefore, all the Principal District Judges under the jurisdiction of Madurai Bench of Madras High Court are directed to submit a report detailing: 1.Number of charge sheets / final reports filed through e-filing before the Judicial Magistrate Courts / Sessions Courts for the past one year; 2.Cases taken on file; 3.Memos issued for defect rectification; 4.Number of cases with submitted rectification reports; 5.Number of charge sheets/ final reports pending without being taken on file and 6.Reasons for the delay.

10. The Inspector General of Police for South Zone and Central Zone and Commissioner of Police, Madurai, Trichy and Tirunelveli City are also directed to submit a report with the same particulars for police stations in the Districts under the jurisdiction of Madurai Bench of Madras High Court.

11. Reports to be submitted on or before 18.10.2024.

12. Post the matter on 21.10.2024.?

4. When the matter was taken up again on 21.10.2024, this Court has observed, ?In pursuance of directions of this Court, the learned Principal District Judges of fourteen Districts have submitted their reports and the Inspector General of Police, South Zone, Madurai, the Inspector General of Police, Central Zone, Trichy, the Commissioner of Police, Madurai City, the Commissioner of Police, Trichy City and the Commissioner of Police, Tirunelveli City have also submitted their report.

2. As per the consolidated report submitted by the Registry, it is shocking to notice that there is a huge difference in the number of charge sheets filed, between the reports submitted by either side. For example, in the Trichy District, the Principal District Judge has submitted a report stating that the Judicial Magistrates and Sessions Judges of Trichy have received 15007 charge sheets in the past one year, whereas, as per the report submitted by the Inspector General of Police, Central Zone, Trichy and the Commissioner of Police, Trichy, Police Stations of Trichy District have filed 5626 charge sheets for the past one year. According to the Principal District Judges report, 9854 charge sheets were taken on file, whereas, as per the report of the Police Authorities, 3743 charge sheets were taken on file. Moreover, according to the Principal District Judge?s report, there are 246 charge sheets yet to be taken on file, whereas, according to the Police Authorities, 1883 charge sheets are yet to be taken on file.

3. It is pertinent to note that for all the fourteen Districts as per the reports of the Principal District Judges, they have received 202694 charge sheets for the past one year. But, as per the reports of the Police Authorities, they have filed 144001 charge sheets for the said period. Moreover, according to the Principal District Judges? report, 14650 charge sheets are yet to be taken on file, whereas, according to the Police Authorities, 42012 charge sheets are yet to be taken on file.

4. Considering the above, the Registry is directed to forward the reports received from the Police Authorities to the concerned Principal District Judges and vice versa. Both are directed to offer their remarks, on or before 25.10.2024. Post the matter on 28.10.2024.?

5. In pursuance of the directions dated 21.10.2024, all the concerned have submitted their reports. The reports submitted by all concerned parties have shed some light on the massive discrepancy in the number of charge sheets filed, as reported by both sides. It appears that the Police Department-s numbers didn-t account for the final reports filed by other departments, such as CBCID, Vigilance and Anti Corruption, RPF. Railway police station, Traffic wing, CSCID, DCB, CCIW, PEW, NIBCID, EOE, Civil Supply, CID, Q Branch, Idol Wing, Food and Safety Department, Cyber Crime and Marine Police. This omission has contributed significantly to the difference in the reported numbers.

6. Some District Judges believe that the disparity can be attributed to the different dates used by the Police Department and the Courts to calculate the cut-off stages. Others have suggested that the Police may have made multiple entries in registering the charge sheets, which could have further exacerbated the discrepancy.

7. Furthermore, there-s a substantial difference in the number of charge sheets that are yet to be taken on file, according to the reports from the Principal District Judges and the Police Authorities. The judges- reports indicate that 14,650 charge sheets are pending, while the Police Authorities claim that the number is much higher, at 42,012.

8. Pursuant to the directions of the Hon-ble e-Committee, Supreme Court of , and the Hon-ble Computer Committee, High Court of Madras, e-filing facilities were introduced in Subordinate Courts in May 2020 for bail matters. This facility was later expanded to all types of cases in the High Court and Subordinate Courts in Tamil Nadu, effective from August 2, 2021. The High Court also introduced District Courts to adopt centralized filing procedures, effective from June 1, 2022, which mandated that all fresh civil and criminal cases be filed through designated filing counters in court complexes. However, in response to objections from the Bar, the High Court has made e-filing mandatory for certain categories of cases, while allowing advocates to choose between e-filing and traditional filing methods for other cases.

9. Pursuant to the High Court-s notification R.O.C.No.75085A/ 2023/Comp3 dated 24.08.2023, the filing of charge sheets by Police Stations in Tamil Nadu and Puducherry has been made mandatory through e-filing. Additionally, the facility of mandatory e-filing of cases has been extended to Courts dealing with Criminal Appeal and Criminal Revision in the District Judiciary, effective from 15.09.2023. To ensure effective implementation, the High Court has also circulated a Standard Operating Procedure for Courts. As a result, charge sheets are now being filed through the e-filing portal by the police stations.

10. The experience gained from the e-filing system so far has shown that there are some technical issues that hinder its proper functioning. These issues have resulted in delays, errors, and inefficiencies, which ultimately affect the overall effectiveness of the system.

11. Furthermore, the e-filing system is also hindered by issues with the designated personnel, who often lack sufficient training and expertise to effectively use the system, and also fail to exercise the necessary care and attention to ensure its proper functioning.

12. The Court is compelled to note that the e-filing system in the criminal side, where it is mandatory, is not functioning optimally. To put it succinctly, all is not well. As previously observed, both parties are engaging in blame-shifting, prompting the Court to identify the issues and develop solutions to improve the system-s efficiency.

13. Notably, the Hon-ble e-Committee, Supreme Court of has introduced the Inter-Operable Criminal Justice System (ICJS) platform which interconnects the CCTNS (Police), CIS (e-Courts), e-Prison (jail), e-Forensic (Forensic Department) and e-Prosecution (Prosecution) and the National Crime Record Bureau (NCRB) is a nodal agency for implementing the ICJS project in coordination with National Informatics Center (NIC).

14. It is pertinent to note that the said system has been put in use in several states across the country, but the same is yet to be implemented in the State of Tamil Nadu due to the incompatibility of the CCTNS platform of Tamil Nadu Police Department with the National ICJS platform. Apparently, the Tamil Nadu Police has been using its own application instead of the one based on the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) standards, which is causing problems with the integration of e-Prosecution, e-Prison and e-Forensic Departments. Despite assurances from the Police Department that the CCTNS 2.0 would be completed by December 2023, thereby facilitating the services offered through the ICJS platform, the project remains unfinished. The reasons for this delay are unclear, and it is essential that the Police Department provides a revised timeline for completion. To resolve this issue, it is crucial that the Home Department, Police Department, and other stakeholders work together to address the compatibility concerns and ensure seamless integration of the e-filing system with other departments.

15. The Inspector General of Police (South and Central Zone) and the Commissioners of Police, Madurai, Trichy, and Tirunelveli City, have raised concerns about the e-filing system in their reports. Specifically, they have stated that the system is not user-friendly. Currently, charge sheets filed by police stations through e-filing are sent to the portal of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, where they are verified and processed by the learned Magistrates. However, if a large number of charge sheets are sent to the Chief Judicial Magistrate portal, it can be challenging for the Magistrates to identify and process their own charge sheets.

16. The IT Registry has brought to the notice of this Court that the ICJS platform is court-specific, whereas the present e-filing system is establishment-specific. To address this issue, the IT Registry has suggested that the Registry be directed to seek permission from the Hon-ble e-Committee, Supreme Court of , to separate all Judicial Magistrate Courts from the centralized Chief Judicial Magistrate establishment and maintain them as separate establishments, until the Police Department completes the CCTNS 2.0. However, this Court is of the view that even if this suggestion is accepted, it would only be a temporary measure and would not fully address the issues faced by stakeholders. Therefore, this Court directs the police department to complete the CCTNS 2.0 within a time frame stipulated by this Court. This direction is intended to provide a permanent solution to the issues faced by stakeholders and to ensure the smooth functioning of the e-filing system.

17. This Court has come to know that, subsequent to the issuance of directions dated 30.09.2024, most of the magistrate courts have proceeded to take up many of the charge sheets that were filed through e-filing and were pending without scrutinization. Similarly, the police have started to attend to the defective charge sheets for which memos were issued by the concerned courts earlier.

18. It is evident from the reports of the learned Principal District Judges that many charge sheets uploaded through e-filing by the Police were defective, resulting in defect memos being uploaded from the Court. However, many of these memos remained unattended. According to the Police, they have attended to many of the defective charge sheets and resubmitted them, but the cases have yet to be taken on file.

19. I have been informed that many charge sheets received through the Centralised Filing system have been found to be defective, and memos have been issued to the Police. However, the Police have not attended to these memos, and as a result, the charge sheets have not been taken on file. Furthermore, even if the defects are rectified, the Courts are hesitant to take the charge sheet on file because they were not filed through e-filing. Additionally, in some cases where the FIR was not sent to the Court, charge sheets that were uploaded through e-filing are not being taken on file due to the lack of an FIR.

20. I have been informed that many charge sheets for old cases, which were already prepared, are available at police stations but cannot be uploaded through e-filing due to technical issues. As a result, these charge sheets are being kept at the police stations. Since this Court has made e-filing mandatory for charge sheets, learned magistrates are not willing to receive manual charge sheets that could not be uploaded through e-filing.

21. In light of this situation, this Court is of the view that, as a one-time measure, learned magistrates should be directed to receive all manual charge sheets pending with police stations for the period prior to 15.09.2023, the date on which e-filing of charge sheets became mandatory. Accordingly, the Director General of Police and Head of Police Force, Tamil Nadu, is requested to instruct all Commissioners of Police and Superintendents of Police to direct all police stations and other wings of the police force to file pending charge sheets/final reports for the period prior to 15.09.2023, before the jurisdictional courts on or before 15.04.2025. The Courts are directed to receive and take the cases on file, if they are otherwise in order, without insisting on the adoption of the e-filing method.

22. While the ultimate goal of the e-filing system is to make courts paper-free, it is essential to maintain a register for receiving FIRs and charge sheets until this goal is achieved. To ensure efficient processing, since the Magistrate- clerks are already overburdened, Head Clerk of each court should be made responsible for receiving and processing charge sheets, with the approval of the concerned judges. As per Rule 25(6) of the Criminal Rules of Practice, the Head Clerk should take cases on file within three days of receipt. The learned Magistrates/Judges should verify the charge sheets and provide their approval for taking cases on file after initial verification by the Head Clerk.

23. Despite initial training, many staff members handling the e-filing system still require guidance. To address this, periodic training sessions should be conducted to ensure that staff members are equipped with the necessary knowledge and skills to effectively manage the e-filing system.

24. To address the issues related to e-filing and charge sheets at the local level, Taluk Level and District level Committee shall be constituted. The Taluk Level committee shall be headed by the Assistant Sessions Judge, if available, Judicial Magistrates, and shall include the Deputy Superintendent of Police/Assistant Commissioner of Police of the respective divisions as members, while the District Level Monitoring Committee shall be headed by the Additional District Judge and the committee shall comprise the Chief Judicial Magistrate, District Additional Superintendent of Police/City Deputy Commissioner of Police, and System Officer of the District Court as members.

25. Both committees shall meet at least once a month to discuss about the filing of charge sheets and other reports by the Police, verification and taking of cases on file by the concerned Court, defect memos issued and re-submission of rectified charge sheets and production of FIR and other incidental affairs.

26. The District Level Monitoring Committee shall also be responsible for monitoring the functioning of the Taluk Level Committee and providing guidance and support as needed to ensure the effective implementation of the e-filing system, which also includes;

1. Technical issues and challenges faced by the Police and Courts in using the e-filing system

2. Training and capacity-building needs for staff members handling the e-filing system

3. Data analytics and performance metrics to track the effectiveness of the e-filing system

4. Inter-agency coordination and communication protocols to ensure smooth functioning of the e-filing system

5. Citizen-centric services and accessibility features to enhance user experience.

27. The Taluk Level Committees and District Level Committees are hereby directed to conduct initial meetings to ascertain the pendency of 1) FIRs, 2) Charge sheets filed but not taken on file, 3) Charge sheets not yet filed and 4) Defective memos issued but not rectified. Thereafter, they shall prepare preliminary reports and proceed further, as directed. The Taluk Level Committees shall submit their preliminary reports to the District Level Committees for review and follow-up. The District Level Committees shall submit consolidated reports, along with compliance reports.

28. It has come to our notice that only a few courts are receiving original documents, while others are not. This discrepancy may cause issues during witness examination. However, we have been informed by the IT Registry that a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) to be followed by the Courts and Advocates was already sent, vide letter R.O.C.Nos. 71816A, 75635A & 76436A/2023/Comp3 dated 30.08.2023, which clearly directs that “in respect of filing of Charge Sheet by the Investigation Officer, the physical copy of filed documents should be produced in the court concerned, upon completion of case registration.“ In light of this, all courts are hereby directed to receive original documents as per the SOP. This will ensure uniformity and consistency in the handling of original documents across all courts.

29. In light of the facts and circumstances of the case, and considering that the charge sheet was taken on file in C.C. No. 24 of 2024 on 01.10.2024, this Court is of the view that the petitioner may be granted liberty to challenge the final report. The petitioner is at liberty to challenge the final report, if so advised. Furthermore, the Police Department is directed to complete the implementation of the Crime and Criminal Tracking Network and Systems (CCTNS) 2.0 within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order. In the event of any technical issues or difficulties, the Police Department is at liberty to seek assistance from the IT Registry of this Court. All Principal District Judges are hereby directed to constitute Taluk Level and District Level Committees to oversee the functioning of the e-filing system and ensure its proper implementation.

30. With these directions, the Criminal Original Petition is disposed of. The Police Department and the Principal District Judges are expected to comply with these orders promptly and ensure that the e-filing system is fully functional and efficient.

31. The Registrar General shall circulate this order to all Principal District Judges in the State for compliance. The Director General of Police and Head of Police Force, Tamilnadu and the Principal District Judges are requested to submit a compliance report on or before 31st May 2025.

32. Post the matter on 02.06.2025