Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(Online)(GAU) 7994

HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY, MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA, JJ
SHAJIT AHMED @ SAJIT AHMED . – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. – Respondent
Crl.A. / 252 / 2022

Advocates:
MR A W AMAN, MR. SURAJIT DAS, MR SARFRAZ NAWAZ, MR S T ADNAN, MS SURAYA RAHMAN, MR S A BARBHUYAN, PP, ASSAM, MS. L DEVI (R-2)

The court highlighted the necessity of appointing a Special Public Prosecutor under the POCSO Act to ensure lawful conduct of trials, especially in light of a debarment order against the existing Public Prosecutor.

Headnote:(A) Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - The issue pertains to the trial of an offence under the POCSO Act, 2012, specifically regarding the appointment and conduct of the Public Prosecutor in the District of Chirang. (Paras 1-2)

(B) Public Prosecutor - The learned Public Prosecutor was debarred from conducting sessions cases due to an order passed by the District & Session Judge, raising questions about the validity of trials conducted during that period. (Paras 3-4)

(C) Special Public Prosecutor - The court inquired whether a Special Public Prosecutor was appointed for POCSO cases during the relevant period, as per Section 32 of the POCSO Act, 2012. (Paras 5-6)

Facts of the case:
The appeal challenges the Judgment and Order dated 24.08.2022, in Special POCSO case no. 05 of 2020, focusing on procedural irregularities involving the Public Prosecutor in the District of Chirang.

Findings of Court:
The court requires clarification on the appointment of a Special Public Prosecutor and the status of trials conducted by the debarred Public Prosecutor.

Issues: The main issues include the legality of trials conducted under the POCSO Act by a debarred Public Prosecutor and the need for a Special Public Prosecutor's appointment.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of adhering to procedural norms under the POCSO Act, specifically regarding the appointment of a Special Public Prosecutor to ensure fair trials.

Result: The case is listed for further proceedings on 13.09.2024.

ORDER

Date : 02.09.2024 (M. Choudhury, J)

Heard Mr. S. Nawaz, learned counsel for the appellant; Ms. B. Bhuyan, learned Senior Counsel and Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent No. 1, State of Assam; and Ms. L. Devi, learned Legal Aid Counsel for the respondent No. 2.

Ms. B. Bhuyan, learned Senior Counsel & Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that an affidavit regarding the state of affairs in the District of Chirang during the relevant period as regards the Office of the Public Prosecutor has been filed.

In this criminal appeal, the issue is regarding trial of an offence under a special act, i.e. the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 [‘POCSO Act, 2012’, for short]. The Judgment and Order dated 24.08.2022, passed in Special POCSO case no. 05 of 2020 is under challenge.

It has been submitted at the Bar that the learned Public Prosecutor, appointed in the district of Chirang, used to conduct the trials before the learned Special Court in respect of cases under the POCSO Act, 2012 during the relevant period of time.

It further transpires that an Order under Memo No. DJCH/V-10/2020- rd 2021/2185, dated Kajalgaon 23 September, 2021, was passed by the then District & Session Judge, Chirang whereby the concerned Public Prosecutor was debarred from conducting the sessions cases which also included cases under the POCSO Act, 2012.

Ms. B. Bhuyan, learned Senior Counsel and Additional Public Prosecutor shall obtain a copy of the Order under Memo No. DJCH/V-10/2020-2021/2185, rd dated Kajalgaon 23 September, 2021 passed by the then District & Session Judge, Chirang. She shall also obtain instruction as to whether during the relevant period of time, a Special Public Prosecutor for conducting cases under the POCSO Act, 2012 was appointed in terms of the provision contained in Section 32 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and to place concerned Notification published in the Official Gazette, if any.

List the case on 13.09.2024.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2024 Supreme(Online)(GAU) 7994

HIGH COURT OF GAUHATIMR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY, MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA, JJSHAJIT AHMED @ SAJIT AHMED . – AppellantVersusTHE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. – RespondentCrl.A. / 252 / 2022

The court highlighted the necessity of appointing a Special Public Prosecutor under the POCSO Act to ensure lawful conduct of trials, especially in light of a debarment order against the existing Public Prosecutor.

HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY, MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA, JJ
SHAJIT AHMED @ SAJIT AHMED . – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. – Respondent
Crl.A. / 252 / 2022