M. F. SALDANHA, J. ( 1 ) WE have heard the learned Additional State Public Prosecutor at some length in this case. ( 2 ) THIS is a case in which the accused who was then aged 20 years, had been pestering the deceased Mumtaz to marry him. Mumtaz was virtually a child being hardly 14 years old and she did not respond to the pressure which the accused was putting on her. The accused is alleged to have thereupon doused her with kerosene and set fire to her clothes. Mumtaz sustained extensive burn injuries covering 95% of her body, she was taken to hospital in a precarious condition and she died after about one day. The prosecution alleges that PW 5 Bhagyamma was one of the first to come there and Bhagyamma has very clearly mentioned in her Police statement that she saw the accused running away from that place. According to her, the deceased stated to her that it was the accused who had set fire to her clothes. Bhagyamma has resailed to some extent from her statement. This is nothing unusual because this Court has had to note with a degree of distress, that the main method of securing acquittals in criminal cases in this State appears to be not by demolishing the prosecution case on merits or by any professional skills but by resort to corrupt means such as by tampering with the witnesses. With due apologies to Hamlet who stated that "something is rotten in the State of Denmark" the situation here appears to be absolutely putrid. Witnesses turning hostile is a malpractice that has become rampant and has reached epidemic or rather malignant proportions and the law does prescribe rigorous action against persons who give false evidence in Court as also against those who induce such a situation. The beneficiary is always the accused who needs to be straightaway hauled up and yet there is not a single instance where counter action has been taken. ( 3 ) THIS has led to a situation whereby the tampering of the evidence has become so rampant that over 90% of the criminal cases and in acquittals. The beneficiary is always the accused who needs to be straightaway hauled up and yet there is not a single instance where counter action has been taken. ( 3 ) THIS has led to a situation whereby the tampering of the evidence has become so rampant that over 90% of the criminal cases and in acquittals. An investigation into the situation indicates that the Police have their own role to play in these operations because they either do not produce witnesses who are inconvenient or they are instrumental in joining hands with the defence in order to tamper with or destroy the oral and documentary evidence. It is therefore absolutely imperative that if the total breakdown of the law and order situation is to be avoided; that Courts will have to make an example at least in a few cases of the persons who are responsible for this, irrespective of who they are, direct action against them and in those of the cases where the culprits are found guilty by awarding exemplary sentences and that the message goes out loud and dear that the Courts will not countenance such atrocities any more. ( 4 ) THERE is another facet to this sordid state of affairs in so far as we have noted with a degree of concern the manner in which the prosecutions are conducted before the trial Courts particularly in serious cases of murder, rape, dacoity etc, even before the Sessions Courts that not only are the competency levels abnormally law in the majority of cases, but we are constrained to observe that the integrity standards are apparently absent. The present case is a classic instance of such a situation wherein the most crucial witness. e. , the doctor has not been examined resulting in effective internal sabotage through with-holding of material evidence. The Public Prosecutor who was incharge of the conduct of the case has not indicated any reasons as to why this important witness has been kept back. We see no justificafion because the record does not indicate that the Doctor was unavailable and even if in a given instance, a doctor is not readily available, the Courts and the Police have necessary powers to ensure that the witness is traced out and brought before the Court. We see no justificafion because the record does not indicate that the Doctor was unavailable and even if in a given instance, a doctor is not readily available, the Courts and the Police have necessary powers to ensure that the witness is traced out and brought before the Court. In the last resort, where the medical evidence is crucial and if the doctor has died or is untraceable, it is still the duty of the prosecution to examine one of the colleagues who can depose on the basis of that record. The cavalier manner in which these prosecutions are being conducted is one of the main reasons why a confidence has grown in criminal circles that there is nothing to fear from the law. ( 5 ) WE are firmly of the view that both these aspects of the matter require to be rectified forthwith. The Director of Public Posecutor shall therefore in consultation with the Law secretary, State of Karnataka file a report before this Court within a period of three weeks from today indicating as to what steps the Government proposes to take in the light of the observations that has been made by this Court. Secondly as far as the present case is concerned, an enquiry will be held and if it is disclosed that the witness was deliberately kept back, appropriate action against the persons responsible shall follow. For this purpose, the Director of Public prosecutions shall direct the institution of a necessary enquiry and shall report back to this Court not later than 10. 4. 1997 indicating the result of the enquiry in question. ( 6 ) THIS is one of the cases in which a young girl has lost her life under gruesome and horrifying condition; where the prosecution has been conducted in an absolutely thoughtless fashion and where purely because of the corrupt practice of tampering with witnesses and the non-production of evidence that the accused has been acquitted. The State of the record is such that within the framework of criminal juris-prudence, it would be impossible to sustain a conviction and the end result therefore is that the accused goes free and gets the benefit of these malpractices. The State of the record is such that within the framework of criminal juris-prudence, it would be impossible to sustain a conviction and the end result therefore is that the accused goes free and gets the benefit of these malpractices. We do not propose to approve of or condone this state of affairs and that is why we have directed the State of Karnataka to indicate what steps are being taken to put a full stop to this situation. ( 7 ) THE Registrar (General) shall forthwith communicate a copy of this order to the Director of public Prosecutions as also the Law Secretary State of Karnataka. With this direction, the appeal stands disposed of.