ORDER Malik, J. - This is a reference by an Honorary Special Magistrate, 1st class, Mainpuri, under S. 341, Criminal P.C. Ulfat Singh and 25 others were charged under Ss. 302, 201, 325 and 323 read with S. 149, 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 furtherance of the common object of an unlawful assembly constituted with the object of preventing (sic) 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 Session by the Special Magistrate by an order dated 28-6-1946. Ulfat Singh accused is deaf and dumb and the learned Magistrate has, therefore, made a reference to this Court under S. 341, Criminal P.C. That section is as follows: If the accused, though not insane, 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 proceedings 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 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 under stand the proceedings. This, I find, he did after he passed his order of commitment, dated 28-6-1946. 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 under stand the proceedings. This, I find, he did after he passed his order of commitment, dated 28-6-1946. 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 defenses 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 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. J 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 Session or is convicted, a reference has to be made under S. 841, Criminal P.C. 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 farther give directions as to how the trial may proceed in the Court of Session. 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. 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 alt 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 he 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 as 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 Singh, who is deaf and dumb.