SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(J&K) 576

JAMMU AND KASHMIR HIGH COURT BENCH AT JAMMU
Pankaj Mithal, Sindhu Sharma, JJ.
Amit Pathania & Anr. – Appellants
Versus
Union of India & Ors. – Respondents
WP(C)PIL No. 43 of 2019, WP(C) No. 4330 of 2019, WP(C) No. 4563 of 2019
Decided On : 21-09-2022

Advocates appeared:
Sh. A.P. Singh, Advocate, Sh. Jagpaul Singh, Advocate, Sh. S. S. Ahmed, Advocate, for the Appellant; Sh. Raman Sharma, AAG, Sh. Sanchit Verma, Advocate, for the Respondent

The main legal point established in the judgment is that the establishment and appointments within the Jammu & Kashmir Prosecution Service were in accordance with the amended provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 applicable to the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir.

Headnote:

Jammu & Kashmir Prosecution Service - Jammu & Kashmir Reorganization Act, 2019 - Section 24, Section 25, Section 25A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - The court discussed the establishment of the Jammu & Kashmir Prosecution Service, the appointment of Public Prosecutors and Assistant Public Prosecutors, and the applicability of the amended provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir.

Fact of the Case:

The Government of Jammu and Kashmir established the Jammu & Kashmir Prosecution Service and made appointments for various positions within the service. The petitioners argued that the appointments were not in line with the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the appointments and establishment of the Jammu & Kashmir Prosecution Service were in accordance with the amended provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 applicable to the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir.

Issues: The main issues were the eligibility and appointment of Public Prosecutors and Assistant Public Prosecutors within the Jammu & Kashmir Prosecution Service, and the applicability of the amended provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the appointments and establishment of the Jammu & Kashmir Prosecution Service were in line with the amended provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and that the petitions were without merit.

Final Decision: All the petitions were found to be without merit and were dismissed by the court.

JUDGMENT

Sharma, J. - In anticipation of the enforcement of the Jammu & Kashmir Reorganization Act, 2019, the Government of Jammu and Kashmir vide order No. 1104-Home of 2019 dated 30.10.2019, accorded sanction to the establishment of Directorate of Prosecution and creation of separate Prosecution Service to be known as Jammu & Kashmir Prosecution Service, comprising of the members of the Jammu & Kashmir Police (Gazetted) Service (Prosecution Wing) and Prosecuting Officers (NonGazetted) as its members. By the impugned order No. 1104-Home of 2019 dated 30.10.2019, sanction was accorded to :-

'6. Now, therefore, sanction is hereby accorded to:

(i) establishment of a Directorate of Prosecution, headed by a Director General (Prosecution), consisting of such posts as may be prescribed;

(ii) creation of a separate prosecution service, to be known as the 'Jammu & Kashmir Prosecution Service', comprising the members of the Jammu and Kashmir Police (Gazetted) Service [Prosecution Wing] and the Prosecuting Officers (Non-Gazetted), as per Annexure, Thereupon, the said persons shall cease to be the Police Officers and, accordingly, excluded from the ambit of the Jammu and Kashmir Police (Gazetted) Service and the Police Rules;

(iii) provision of allowances, other facilities and benefits, as per their present entitlement, notwithstanding such exclusion. However, appropriate orders shall be issued separately, to provide for such allowances or equivalent thereto:

(iv) notification of recruitment rules, providing for method of recruitment and service conditions of the members of the Prosecution Service, after due consideration of the requirement for fresh creation of posts and promotional avenues, apart from provision of reserves to meet the requirement of the Anti Corruption Bureau, Vigilance Commission, Training Institutes and various Police formations, etc...'

02. The Government vide order No. 01-Home of 2019 dated 31.10.2019 issued the following orders:-

'In the interest of administration, it is hereby ordered that the following Deputy Directors (Prosecution) [DDsP] of the J&K Prosecution Service shall oversee the functioning of the Public Prosecutors (PPs)/Additional Public Prosecutors (APPs)/Assistant PPs in the areas of jurisdiction, as indicate against each, till further orders.....'

03. Accordingly, seven persons were appointed as Deputy Directors (Prosecution) [DDsP] for different Districts. Subsequently, the Government issued two notifications on 31.10.2019, in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 24 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and vide S.O. 05 dated 31.10.2019, appointed Chief Prosecuting Officers (CPOs) of the Jammu & Kashmir Prosecution Service as Public Prosecutors (PPs)/Additional Public Prosecutors (APPs) and posted them in different Districts in Courts of Sessions Judge and Additional Sessions Judge as mentioned in the notification. By this order, 39 persons were appointed on the post of Public Prosecutors (PPs)/Additional Public Prosecutors (APPs).

04. By another notification i.e., S.O. 06 of even date, in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 25 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Senior Prosecuting Officers and Prosecuting Officers of the Jammu and Kashmir Prosecution Service were appointed as Assistant Public Prosecutors (APPs). By this order, as many as 54 persons were appointed in the Courts of Chief Judicial Magistrates and Sub-Judges, who were exercising the powers of the Judicial Magistrates and 82 persons were posted in the Courts of Munsiff Magistrate as well as Munsiff Mobile Magistrate.

05. The grievance of the petitioners as projected by learned counsel Sh. A.P. Singh, appearing on behalf of the practicing Advocates are; that there was no regular cadre of Prosecution Service in the erstwhile State of Jammu & Kashmir and, therefore, the benefit of Subsection (9) of Section 24 of Cr.P.C. cannot be extended to those, who have been appointed as Public Prosecutors and Additional Public Prose

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top