JUDGEMENT 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. 2. Initially case was instituted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. However, later on, it has been converted into one under Section 396 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. From the F.I.R. it appears that the Chowkidar received some information that a dead body was found lying somewhere on Bikram-Bihta Main Road and the people had gathered there to have a look of it. He accordingly informed the police station and went to the place where he found dead body of a young man of 27-28 years with head chopped off with some sharp cutting weapon. There, he received information that about one kilometer away there was another dead body lying by the side of a wheat field. He went there and found that the said dead body was also of a young man with its head chopped off in the same manner. By looking to the dead bodies, it appeared to him that the bodies were of driver and khalasi of some vehicle. He recorded his fardbeyan before the police on the basis of which this Bikram P.S. Case No. 79 of 2007 was registered on 2.3.2007. 4. It appears that not much progress was made in the case for quite some time. However, police of Bikram Police Station came to know some time in September, 2007 that three persons have been arrested by the police team of Paliganj Police Station while trying to hijack an Oil Tanker for which Paliganj P.S. Case No. 139 of 2007 was registered. In the Paliganj Police Station three persons, which included these two petitioners also, allegedly made confession in which they said that they were involved in three more cases of such type including the case of hijacking of truck and murder of driver and khalasi. On receiving such information, the Investigating Officer of the present case went to Paliganj Police Station and obtained photocopies of their confessional statements. As the description of one of the crime committed by three of the accused persons tallied with the description of this case all the three accused persons were remanded in this case on 21.1.2008. 5. On receiving such information, the Investigating Officer of the present case went to Paliganj Police Station and obtained photocopies of their confessional statements. As the description of one of the crime committed by three of the accused persons tallied with the description of this case all the three accused persons were remanded in this case on 21.1.2008. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that only the photocopies of confessional statements made by the three accused persons, including these two petitioners, in connection with Paliganj P.S. Case No. 139 of 2007, have been used in this case for implicating them with the crime related to this case. He also submits that in the alleged confessional statements, the accused persons, although did accept their involvement in the crime, but clearly stated that the driver and khalasi of the earlier hijacked truck were murdered by three different persons, who were specifically named. He submits that except for the photocopies of their confessional statements made in connection with other case, there is no material in this case against petitioners. Still the Investigating Officer of this case has submitted charge-sheet against petitioners and the third accused under Section 396 of the Indian Penal Code. He submits that there is absolutely no material on the records which can be in any way used for their trial and conviction in the case. He also submits that in view of such blatantly defective submission of charge-sheet, other accused persons have been allowed bail. He also submits that photocopies of confessional statements have been used by the police to implicate these accused persons in other three cases also. However, in all the three cases, these two petitioners as well other accused persons have been allowed bail. He submits that in this case also, except for these two petitioners, other accused persons have been allowed bail which will be evident from the orders passed by this Court, annexed as Annexures-2 and 2/A. 6. Learned counsel for the State submits that in the confessional statement before Paliganj Police, petitioners had given details of the crime committed which appeared similar to the crime committed in this case and on the basis of the same, Bikram Police came to the conclusion that these petitioners may be connected with this crime also and on that basis investigation has been completed and chargesheet has been submitted in this case. 7. 7. Confessional statement before the police on its own, is not admissible in law, more so, if the confessional statement has been recorded in connection with one case and photocopy of the same is being used in the other case. 8. Case diary was called for and the case diary does not show that there is any separate material from the copy of the confessional statement nor is there anything to show that any confessional statement was recorded by the police in the present case. This also does not appear from the record that subsequent to the confessional statement any recovery was made by the police which could connect the confessional statement directly to the crime. This is also not denied that other accused persons including these petitioners have been allowed bail in other three cases. In the present case also except for these two petitioners, Others have been allowed bail by this Court. 9. Therefore, in view of scanty materials available on the records of this case against petitioners and inadmissible photocopies of confessional statements used by the Investigating Officer of this case for submitting charge-sheet and in view of the fact that other accused persons have been allowed bail in this case as well as in other three cases also in which they have been implicated on the basis of said confessional statement, this application is allowed. Let both the petitioners be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of A.C.J.M, Danapur in Bikram P.S. Case No. 79 of 2007 with conditions as laid down in sub-section (3) of Section 437 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as may be applicable and also that one of the bailors shall be a close relation of the petitioner. In case of breach of any of the conditions at any stage to the satisfaction of the concerned court below, it shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the petitioners and take steps for their arrest. 10. Before parting with the case, this Court would like to record its concern with regard to manner of investigation being conducted by the Investigating Officers in criminal cases. On being assigned with bail matters, this Court has come across a disturbing trend which has set-in in the investigation of criminal cases in the State. 10. Before parting with the case, this Court would like to record its concern with regard to manner of investigation being conducted by the Investigating Officers in criminal cases. On being assigned with bail matters, this Court has come across a disturbing trend which has set-in in the investigation of criminal cases in the State. In large number of cases including cases of heinous crimes, this Court has found that, merely on the basis of confessional statement of accused recorded in the police diary and without further investigation the Investigating Officers submit chargesheet. It is well known that in law such confessional statement has no evidentiary value. This is known to the Investigating Officers also. In spite of that, they shirk from their responsibility from making any further investigation to collect corroborating materials and evidences sustainable in a court of law in the matter and submit charge-sheet merely on the basis of confessional statement of the accused. No step is taken by them to get the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. The Investigating Officers find it convenient to absolve themselves of their responsibility in the case by merely submitting charge-sheet in such manner. May be due to short of hands, may be due to their engagement in other duties or may be due to extraneous considerations, they adopt this method. They also know it very well that the trial will ultimately end in acquittal because of this faulty investigation. They also know that no responsibility will be fastened on them and they will not be made accountable for the same. This gives them a complete free hand to close the cases and make themselves free of the burden of investigation of the case. 11. Government resolve to wipe out crime from the State is a welcome change from the past. But every pious resolution has to be followed with action and result. Otherwise the same remains an unfulfilled dream and cause of frustration and disappointment among the people having high hopes from the Government. Creating deterrence and preventing crime is one part of the act to fulfil the resolve. But mere preventing the crime by intensive police patrolling and vigilance is not sufficient. In case crime is committed, it must be properly investigated, the culprit should be booked and he should be convicted at the earliest. Creating deterrence and preventing crime is one part of the act to fulfil the resolve. But mere preventing the crime by intensive police patrolling and vigilance is not sufficient. In case crime is committed, it must be properly investigated, the culprit should be booked and he should be convicted at the earliest. Quick and firm action against a criminal deters others also from indulging into crime. Therefore, a proper investigation with collection of, sufficient materials which may sustain in trial and end in conviction is also very essential part of the duties of the police administration. 12. With this in mind, this Court had requested the D.I.G., Patna to appear in the case and express his views. He appeared on 16.10.2009 alongwith learned Additional Advocate General No. 3 and produced a usefui compilation of laws relating to investigation. Thereafter, on the request of this Court, learned Additional Advocate General No. 3 agreed to discuss the matter with the Director General of Police and to work out as to in what manner quality of investigation of criminal cases in the State can be improved and in what manner the Investigating Officers can- be made more responsible and accountable for proper investigation. 13. Learned Additional Advocate General No. 3 has appeared and has informed this Court, by producing a communication by the I.G. (Headquarters) to him dated 8.12.2009, that in view of significance of the matter, the Director General of Police, Bihar has referred the matter to a Core Committee comprising of senior officers of the rank of ADG for detailed examination. Learned Additional Advocate General No. 3 submits that this may take two weeks time and therefore, he has prayed for an adjournment to apprise this Court as to what fruitful result has come out in the deliberation of the said Core Committee. 14. With the hope that this concern and anxiety of the Court will bear some fruits and the police administration will look into the matter and will chalk out a definite course of action to improve the situation, this case is adjourned for two weeks, as requested by learned Additional Advocate General No. 3. 15. Put up on 7th January, 2010 at 2.00 P.M. as a first case. 16. Let a copy of, this order be handed over to learned counsel for the State.