ORDER : Heard Ms. Soni Shrivastava, learned Amicus Curiae and Sri Prabhu Narayan Sharma, learned A.C. to learned A.G. The Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Home, Government of Bihar has filed a comprehensive report as to the present condition of the buildings of the Police Station in the State of Bihar and the existing infrastructures with regard to the keeping of the records of the cases. 2. Before I take note of the information furnished in the counter affidavit of the Additional Chief Secretary it would be appropriate to mention the facts and circumstances under which in the present case which is a regular bail petition, occasion arose for seeking a comprehensive report from the Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Home. 3. In fact, in course of hearing of the regular bail petition, this Court noticed that the petitioner has declared only one criminal antecedent in paragraph ‘3’ of the petition but learned counsel for the informant while opposing the prayer for bail of the petitioner informed that the petitioner has got eight criminal antecedents. To get a clarity on the issue, this Court vide its order dated 21.09.2021, called for a report as to the criminal antecedent of the petitioner from the office of the Superintendent of Police, Patna. The report received from the office of the Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna as contained in letter no. 1614 dated 15th November, 2021 revealed that the petitioner has got three cases on his head. Still learned counsel for the informant insisted and submitted a list of at least eight cases against the petitioner. This Court has recorded this development in its order dated 24.11.2021 which reads as under:- “Report from the Office of Senior Superintendent of Police,Patna has been received vide Letter No. 1614 dated 15th November,2021. According to the said report, the petitioner has got 3 cases on his head, however, Mr. Nawal Kishore Prasad, learned counsel representing the informant has placed before this Court a list of 8 cases including the present case against the petitioner. Those cases are as under:- 1. Shahpur P.S. Case No. 134 of 2018 2. Naubatpur P.S. Case No. 156 of 2014 3. Naubatpur P.S. Case No. 200 of 2007 4. Naubatpur P.S. Case No. 262 of 2020 5. Naubatpur P.S. Case No. 258 of 2010 6. Complaint Case No. 144(C) /2014 7. Naubatpur P.S. Case No. 301 of 2019 8. Those cases are as under:- 1. Shahpur P.S. Case No. 134 of 2018 2. Naubatpur P.S. Case No. 156 of 2014 3. Naubatpur P.S. Case No. 200 of 2007 4. Naubatpur P.S. Case No. 262 of 2020 5. Naubatpur P.S. Case No. 258 of 2010 6. Complaint Case No. 144(C) /2014 7. Naubatpur P.S. Case No. 301 of 2019 8. Naubatpur P.S. Case No. 155 of 2007 If the statements made on behalf of the informant together with the list of cases produced before this Court are correct then it would raise a question mark upon the competence of the Investigating Agency and the system who is responsible to investigate and supervise the criminal cases. It will raise a finger on the information sources of the Investigating Agency, therefore, one more opportunity is being granted to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna to verify this information and submit another report to this Court. Needless to say that in case the list furnished on behalf of the informant is found to be correct then a comprehensive reason as to why the Office of the Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna was not aware of all the cases pending against the accused be recorded in the fresh report. Let such report be placed before this Court within two weeks. List this case on 08.12.2021 under the same heading. Let the said list be taken on the record. Since learned Advocate General has been made aware of this case, let a copy of this order be sent to the Office of learned Advocate General.” 4. In compliance of the abovementioned order when a report was received from the office of the Senior Superintendent the of Police, Patna as contained in letter no. 1807 dated December, 2021, this Court noticed the information saying that the records pertaining to the criminal cases which were lying in old building of Naubatpur Police Station could not be properly maintained and brought to the new building, the records which were not duly maintained got damaged in the rainy season. Since the criminal antecedent of an accused is one of the factors which the Court is required to look into while considering the prayer for bail, this Court took the issue seriously with inquisitiveness to discover why the complete criminal antecedent of the petitioner could not be provided. This Court, therefore, vide its order dated 16.12.2021 appointed Ms. Since the criminal antecedent of an accused is one of the factors which the Court is required to look into while considering the prayer for bail, this Court took the issue seriously with inquisitiveness to discover why the complete criminal antecedent of the petitioner could not be provided. This Court, therefore, vide its order dated 16.12.2021 appointed Ms. Soni Shrivastava, an Advocate of this Court as an Amicus Curiae in this case and to submit a report after taking stock of the situation of the records which are in damaged condition. The order dated 16.12.2021 reads as under:- “Perused the report kept at Flag ‘R’. By this report contained in Letter No. 1807 dated 7th December, 2021, the Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna has informed this Court that earlier the Officer-in-charge of Naubatpur Police Station had provided only three criminal antecedents of the petitioner because the records pertaining to the criminal cases lying in the old building of Naubatpur Police Station could not be properly maintained and brought to the new building. The report further says that because those records were not duly maintained, they have been damaged in the rainy season. Now the Officer-in-charge of the Police Station has reported that there are seven cases registered with Naubatpur Police Station and one case with Sahpur Police Station against this petitioner. The report which has been submitted by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna shows that all is not well with the Police Station and in fact by furnishing a wrong information with regard to the criminal antecedent of the petitioner, the Officer-in-charge of the Police Station had only been a party to the concealment of criminal antecedent at the end of the petitioner who has in paragraph ‘3’ of the present application disclosed that he has got only one criminal antecedent. At this stage, this Court appoints Ms. Soni Shrivastava, an Advocate of this Court an amicus curiae in this case. The learned amicus curiae will visit the Naubatpur Police Station and take stock of the situation of the records which are in damaged condition in the old building and submit a complete report in this regard. Mr. Prabhu Narayan Sharma, learned A.C. to A.G. shall accompany her in course of her visit to Naubatpur Police Station. All facilities in this regard shall be provided by the office of the Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna. Mr. Prabhu Narayan Sharma, learned A.C. to A.G. shall accompany her in course of her visit to Naubatpur Police Station. All facilities in this regard shall be provided by the office of the Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna. Let this case be listed on 5th of January, 2022 under the heading “To Be Mentioned.” During this period, the learned amicus curiae shall place the report. ” 5. In her report, the learned Amicus Curiae reported that there were several records which have been retrieved from the old building and those were kept at the different places in the new building, the report further says that several documents have been completely damaged and those remained lying in the old building were not in good shape to handle them. One of the reasons for such condition noticed by the learned Amicus Curiae is that the Police Station’s building had a Terracota (Khapra) roof which allowed water to seep through causing damage to the papers due to dampness and termites. 6. Learned Amicus Curiae as well as Mr. Prabhu Narayan Sharma, learned A.C. to learned A.G informed this Court that in one PIL being C.W.J.C. 5924 of 2019 (Om Prakash versus State of Bihar and others), the Hon’ble Division Bench is looking into the issue of digitization of the records of the police stations. Learned Advocates suggested at the Bar that the issues which have cropped up in this case is with regard to the infrastructure of the police stations and due to poor infrastructure and lack of digitalization of the police stations even the office of the Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna was unable to provide the complete antecedent report of the petitioner in this case. Learned Advocate, thus, suggested that this issue should be brought to the notice of the Hon’ble Division Bench and it will be in the interest of public at large. 7. On 02.02.2022 while hearing of Cr. Misc. No. 38522 of 2022, this Court noticed that the Kadamkuan Police Station when called upon to provide the criminal antecedent of the petitioner in the said case reported no criminal antecedent but later on it was found that the said petitioner had got two criminal antecedents. Learned Amicus Curiae informed this Court that Kadamkuan Police Station is being run from the premises of Moinul Haq Stadium, Rajendra Nagar, Patna. Learned Amicus Curiae informed this Court that Kadamkuan Police Station is being run from the premises of Moinul Haq Stadium, Rajendra Nagar, Patna. These facts are duly recorded in the order dated 02.02.2022 passed in this case. 8. In the aforementioned background when this Court called upon the Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Home to submit a comprehensive report, the counter affidavit has been filed. Paragraphs ‘7’, ‘8’ and ‘9’ of the counter affidavit are being reproduced hereinbelow:- “07 That the brief summary of the present status of Police Station as per report of Police Headquarter is given below:- SL. Subject Total No. of Police Station Remarks 1. Total No. of notified Police Station 1016 1. Decisions have been taken to construct all notified Police Station on priority basis. 2. All 38 Naxal and remote Police Stations will be made functional after construction. There is a provision of Malkhana/Sirista in all new building. 2. Total No. of notified P.S. that are presently not functioned (under construction) 38 3. Functioning in own building 724 There is provision of Malkhana in all functional Police Stations. There is need of additional land for construction of Malkhana in 39 P.S. 4. Functioning in rented building and another building 254 5. Under construction 111 New buildings are being constructed for the old Police Station whose own building is dilapidated. There is a provision of Malkhana/Sirista in all sanctioned constructed/under constructed Police Stations. 6. Sanctioned for construction in current financial year 114 7. Proposed for repair 165 165 Police Station/Malkhana will be repaired on priority basis in the financial year 2022-2023. There is proposal of upgradation of 39 Malkhana 8. Additional Space required for Malkhana 39 “08 That it has been specifically mentioned in the aforesaid report of the Police Headquarter that up gradation and construction of Police Station/Malkhana will be carried out on priority basis in the financial year 2022-2023.” “09 That it is relevant to mention that Home Department has accorded administrative sanction of amount of Rs. 105422.241 lack (1054 Crore 22 lakh and 24 thousand one hundred) for the construction of Police Station/O.P and important building of Police Building in the current financial year 2021-2022 under the head of Police Building. Home Department has made available of Rs. 105422.241 lack (1054 Crore 22 lakh and 24 thousand one hundred) for the construction of Police Station/O.P and important building of Police Building in the current financial year 2021-2022 under the head of Police Building. Home Department has made available of Rs. 50325.028 lack (503 crore, 25 lakh and 2 thousand 8 hundred) to Bihar Police Building Construction Corporation for construction of Bihar Police Station and O.P. in the current financial year 2021-2022.” 9. A perusal of paragraph ‘7’ alone would show that there are at least 38 numbers of notified Police Stations which are presently not functioning and from the remarks column it appears that all 38 Naxal and remote Police Stations will be made functional after construction. There is no clarity as to how much time it is likely to take in making the 38 Naxal and remote Police Stations functional. 10. The fact that in Naxal and remote areas though 38 Police Stations have been notified but they are not functional is a matter which is required to be looked into in the interest of the public at large. It is against the interest of general public and is in fact causing public injury. The fact that there are several Police Stations which are functioning in rented house without a Malkhana is a serious matter and these are directly related to the Justice Delivery System in Criminal Law Administration. 11. Today, once again learned Amicus Curiae and Mr. Prabhu Narayan Sharma, learned A.C. to learned A.G have jointly submitted that this matter requires consideration and monitoring by an appropriate Bench dealing with the Public Interest Litigation. 12. This Court takes judicial notice of the materials available in the record. 13. In the given background, this Court is of the considered opinion that the records of this case be placed before Hon’ble the Chief Justice to consider registering this as a Public Interest Litigation on the basis of the discussions which have transpired and recorded in this order and to take up the issue accordingly by an appropriate Bench. Ordered accordingly.