Back
ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Muktadar, J
Baban and Others v. Sambamurthy and Another
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. competence of assistant police prosecuting officer to conduct prosecution. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. validity of appointment under crpc, 1973. (Para 3 , 8 , 13) |
| 3. interpretation of administrative roles and duties. (Para 4 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. classification of prosecution personnel. (Para 5 , 6 , 9) |
| 5. final determination on dismissal of the petition. (Para 12 , 14) |
1. This Criminal Revision case comes before us on a reference made by our learned brother Muktadar, J. The question that arises for consideration is whether the respondent No. 1, who was appointed as Asstt. Police Prosecuting Officer and was then conducting C. C. No. 437/78 on the file of IV Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, is competent to conduct the prosecution. It is the contention of the petitioners that the 1st respondent is the Assistant Police Prosecuting Officer who was appointed by the Inspector - General of Police in the year 1956 and is a 'Police Officer.' Having regard to S. 25 of the CrPC, 1973 (Act II of 1974), only the State Government is competent to appoint an Assistant Public Prosecutor for conducting the prosecutions in the Courts of Magistrates. However, the State Government, except as provided in s
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
