JUDGMENT Malik, J. - This is a reference by an Honorary Special Magistrate, 1st class, Mainpuri, u/s 341 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Ulfat Singh and 25 others were charged under Sections 302, 201, 325 and 323 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code for having committed the murder of Suraj Pal. They were also charged for having caused the evidence of his murder to disappear and having caused grievous hurt to Gokulpuri and simple hurt to Khyali and others in furtherence of the common object of an unlawful assembly constituted with the object of preventing Lajja Ram and others from recovering their bullocks which had been forcibly taken away by the accused. The accused were committed to stand their trial before the Court of Sessions by the Special Magistrate by an order dated the 28th Juue, 1946. Ulfat Singh accused is deaf and dumb and the learned Magistrate has, therefore, made a reference to this Court u/s 341 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. That section is as follows: If the accused though not insame, cannot be made to understand the proceedings, the Court may proceed with the inquiry or trial, and in the case of a Court other than a High Court, if such inquiry results in a commitment or if such a trial results in a conviction, the proceeding shall be forwarded to the High Court with a report of the circumstances of the case, and the High Court shall pass thereon such order as it thinks fit. 2. It would appear from the section that the Court has first to find whether the accused can be made to understand the proceedings. If the Court finds that he cannot it may proceed with inquiry, or trial but the proceedings have to be forwarded to the High Court with a report of the circumstances of the case for suitable orders by the High Court. It appears that the learned Magistrate called for a report from the Civil Surgeon whether Ulfat Singh was able to understand the proceedings. This, I find, he did after he passed his order of commitment dated the 28th of June 1946. As I read the section, he should have done it before he passed his commitment order. It appears that the learned Magistrate called for a report from the Civil Surgeon whether Ulfat Singh was able to understand the proceedings. This, I find, he did after he passed his order of commitment dated the 28th of June 1946. As I read the section, he should have done it before he passed his commitment order. The Civil Surgeon after examining the accused made a report that "he is incapable of understanding the spoken language but he can understand the written language If he knows them". From the report made by the learned Special Magistrate, it does not appear whether Ulfat Singh is literate. The Civil Surgeon was of opinion that the accused was not insane and was capable of understanding the proceedings of the Court; that his brain is clear, he obeys orders and reacts to all the signs correctly and quickly. The charges against the accused are of a very serious nature and there is no provision in the Indian Penal Code under which he could be exempted from punishment merely because he is deaf and dumb. 3. Under the circumstances the Courts have to do their best to see that the trial is a fair trial and the accused gets a chance of putting up such defences as he may have. I was anxious to find out whether there was any precedent which would guide me in deciding what I should do in a case of this kind. The precedents that I have been put up by the office are of cases where the deaf and dumb persons committed very minor offences and the Courts in several of those cases directed the proceedings to be dropped. I cannot pass a similar order in this case. 4. Where a deaf or dumb person is committed to stand his trial in the Court of Sessions or is convicted, a reference has to be made u/s 341 Code of Criminal Procedure as a measure of extra precaution so that the High Court may satisfy itself that, under the circumstances, it was a fair trial or enquiry and in the case of an order of commitment the High Court may further give direction as to how the trial may proceed in the Court of Sessions. 5. 5. In this case there are in all 26 accused and the brother of the deaf and dumb accused is also one of the accused, The case against all the accused is common and the evidence is the same. I do not therefore propose to interfere with the order of commitment. To ensure a fair trial, however, I consider that a special counsel should be appointed for the accused at Government cost who may explain to the accused the nature of the charge by signs and other means and put up on his behalf such defences as be may consider proper or as the accused may desire. 6. The Civil Surgeon in his report at one place has said that the accused is "incapacitated of understanding or ordinarily there are no means to carry to his mind the proceedings of the Court". At another place the Civil Surgeon has said that the accused is dumb but not completely deaf. It may, therefore, be possible for special Counsel to get instructions from the accused. That is however, the best that I can suggest. 7. I, therefore, order that special counsel should be appointed at the cost of the Government for the defence of Ulfat Singh, who is deaf and dumb.