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

2010 Supreme(MP) 582

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
Sanjay Yadav, J.
Smt. Anifa Khan
Vs.
The State of M.P. and Ors.
Writ Petition No. 9073/2009
Decided On: 05.08.2010

The main legal point established is that the procedure laid down in Section 24 of the Code for the appointment of Public Prosecutor and Additional Public Prosecutor must be strictly followed, and the extension of the term cannot be claimed as a matter of right.

Headnote:

Extension - Govt. Pleader Appointment - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Section 24 - Rule 18 of the Legal Remembrancer Manual

Fact of the Case:

The petition challenges the extension of the term of Govt. Pleader/Additional Govt. Pleader under Section 24 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and Rule 18 of the Legal Remembrancer Manual.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the extension of the term of the Govt. Pleader/Additional Govt. Pleader was not in accordance with the procedure laid down under Section 24 of the Code, and therefore quashed the appointment. The court directed that future appointments be made strictly in accordance with the procedure laid down under Section 24.

Issues: The issues revolved around the legality of the extension of the term of the Govt. Pleader/Additional Govt. Pleader and the procedural compliance with Section 24 of the Code.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the procedure prescribed in Section 24 of the Code for the appointment of Public Prosecutor and Additional Public Prosecutor must be followed, and the extension of the term cannot be claimed as a matter of right. The court emphasized the importance of effective consultation between the Sessions Judge and the District Magistrate for the appointment.

Final Decision: The petition was allowed, and the appointment of Govt. Pleader/Additional Govt. Pleader was quashed. The court directed that future appointments be made strictly in accordance with the procedure laid down under Section 24.

ORDER

Sanjay Yadav, J.

1. Heard.

2. With the consent of the Learned Counsel for the parties, petition is heard finally.

3. Extension as Govt. Pleader/Additional Govt. Pleader of Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 respectively vide order dated 5-8-09 for a period of three years purportedly in exercise of powers under Section 24 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred as Code) read with Rule 18 of the Legal Remembrancer Manual is being questioned in the present writ petition filed under Section 226 of the Constitution of India.

4. Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 were appointed as Govt. Pleader/ Additional Govt. Pleader under Section 24 of the Code by virtue of order dated 29-12-05 for a period of three years. That on expiry of said period of three years the term has been extended for a further period of three years by impugned order, on the basis of the proposal by the District Magistrate (Annexure P-4) and the recommendation of the District and Sessions Judge, Balaghat (Annexure P-5).

5. The extension has given rise to grievance to the Petitioner for reasons that though eligible, the Petitioner has not been considered, Ancillarily, it is also claimed that the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 ought to have taken into consideration the women reservation.

6. It is contended that, the extension is de hors the provision contained under Section 24 of the Code, which the Petitioner submits, does not provide for extension as the mode of appointment.

7. The Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 have justified there action of extending the term of Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 for a period of three years. It is urged that, the same is in consonance with the provisions as contained in the Legal Remembrancer Manual. It is accordingly urged that, there being no illegality in extending the term of the Respondent Nos. 3 and 4, the Petitioner is not entitled for any relief.

8. Considered the submissions and perused the pleadings as well as the provisions as contained under Section 24 and in the Legal Remembrancer Manual.

Section 24 of the Code provides for:

24. (1) For every High Court, the Central Government or the State Government shall, after consultation with the High Court, appoint a Public Prosecutor and may also appoint one or more Additional Public Prosecutor for conducting in such Court, any prosecution, appeal or other proceeding on behalf of the Central Government or State Government, as the case may be.

(2) The Central Government may appoint one or more Public Prosecutors for the purpose of conducting any case or class of cases in any district, or local area.

(3) For every districts the State Government shall appoint a Public Prosecutor and may also appoint one or more Additional Public Prosecutors for the District:

Provided that the Public Prosecutor or Additional Public Prosecutor appointed for one district may be appointed also to be a Public Prosecutor or an Additional Public Prosecutor, as the case may, for another district.

(4) The District Magistrate shall, in consolation with the Sessions Judge, prepare, a panel of names of persons, who are, in his opinion fit to be appointed as Public Prosecutor or Additional Public Prosecutors for the District.

(5) No person shall be appointed by the State Government as the Public Prosecutor or Additional Public Prosecutor for the district unless his name appears in the panel of names prepared by the District Magistrate under Sub-section (4).

(6) Notwithstanding anything contained in Sub-section (5), where in a State there exists a regular Cadre of Prosecuting Officers, the State Government shall appoint a Public Prosecutor or an Additional Public Prosecutor only from among the persons constituting, such Cadre:

Provided that where, in the opinion of the State Government, no suitable person is available in such Cadre for such appointment that Government may appoint a person as Public Prosecutor or Additional Public Prosecutor, as the case may be, from the panel of names prepared by, the District Magistrate under Sub-section (4).

(7) A























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top