Number Of Convictions, Acquittals Obtained By Prosecutors Can't Be Sole Basis For Adverse Entries Against Them: Rajasthan High Court

While dismissing challenge to the Annual Appraisal Performance Form (“Form”) of the Prosecution Officers, Rajasthan High Court opined that collection of data regarding the number of convictions and acquittals per se could not be said to be an arbitrary action as long as that data was not being used for recording adverse entries against the officers.The bench of Justice Munnuri Laxman however held that if the data was used for recording performance simply based on the number of acquittals or convictions, it would violate the principles of fair play. For context, the petition was filed by the Rajasthan Prosecution Officers Association, challenging the Form, based on the data required under certain columns of the Form. The data in contention related to, a) acquittals and convictions of number of cases; b) number of witnesses examined through videoconferencing; c) number of cases entered into the e-prosecution portal. It was the apprehension of the petitioner that such data was being used to evaluate the performance of the officers which was not allowed. It was argued that since the number of acquittals or convictions were not dependent upon the prosecution officer, it could not be a criterion to rank the officer. Further, the petitions submitted that since there was no infrastructure for video-conferencing the witnesses or recording the number of cases on e-prosecution portal, such data could not be used for evaluating officers' performance. After hearing the contentions, the Court firstly observed, “It is needless to say that conviction or acquittal is not always in the domain of the Public Prosecutor; it depends upon various factors. There may be instances where conviction or acquittal could be on account of lapses on the part of the presenting officer, i.e., the prosecuting officer who represents the State in presenting its case. The prosecutor is required to act as an independent court officer and not a representative of the State.”At the same time, it was opined that collection of data per se could not be an arbitrary action.Further in relation to the data on the number of witnesses examined through video-conferencing, the Court held that the requirement of furnishing the data in itself was not bad since it might be relevant to apprise the actions taken by the officer. The Court also stated that entry of data on the e-portal was the primary duty of the clerk who was working under the officer who, in turn, had a duty to ensure that if the infrastructure was available, such data was entered. “…he has a supervisory role in ensuring such entry. Wherever infrastructure is not available, the same can be mentioned in the relevant column, and merely because infrastructure is not available in some offices, insisting on such data per se is not illegal.”In this background, the Court dismissed the petition with a direction to the respondent to not use the data regarding the number of acquittals and convictions, to record any adverse entries against the officer. The Court held that the apprehension of the petitioner that such data shall be used for evaluation was without any foundation. Accordingly, the petition was dismissed. Title: Rajasthan Prosecution Officers Association v State of Rajasthan & Ors. Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 182Click Here To Read/Download Order

Number Of Convictions, Acquittals Obtained By Prosecutors Can't Be Sole Basis For Adverse Entries Against Them: Rajasthan High Court

Nupur Agrawal

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Number Of Convictions, Acquittals Obtained By Prosecutors Can't Be Sole Basis For Adverse Entries Against Them: Rajasthan High Court

Nupur Agrawal

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers