S.S.MALTE
Hukam Chand – Appellant
Versus
State Of Haryana – Respondent
S.S.Malte, J.
1. This revision petition has been filed against the order by which the Addl. Session Judge, Kaithal has passed the order by which one R.C. Gugnani, Advocate appearing for the complainant was allowed to conduct the case under the supervision, guidance and control of the Public Prosecutor while the Public Prosecutor retaining control over the proceedings. The brief question would be whether such an order is in accordance with the provision of Sections 301 and 302 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
2. In order to appreciate the point involved in this case, it would be necessary to bear in mind that the appointment of a public prosecutor is made as per Section 24 of the Criminal Procedure Code. It provides that the State may appoint Public Prosecutor and one or more Additional Public Prosecutors for conducting the cases in the Court. In the context of point raised in this case, it is pertinent to note that clause 8 of Section 24 of the Criminal Procedure Code empowers the Government to appoint a practicing lawyer having not less than 10 years practice, as a special public prosecutor for the purpose of conducting a case or class of cases. This provision clearly indic
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.