Govt Pleaders & Prosecutors Must Be Appointed On Merit; Not On Political Considerations Or Nepotism : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Wednesday (January 29) bemoaned the trend of Governments appointing Government Pleaders and Public Prosecutors in High Courts on political considerations. The Court said that "favouritism and nepotism" should not be factors while appointing Government Pleaders and Public Prosecutors.A bench comprising Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice R Mahadevan observed :"This judgement is a message to all the State Governments that the AGPs and APPs in respective High Courts should be appointed solely on the merit of the person. The State Government owes a duty to ascertain the ability of the person; how proficient the person is in law, his overall background, his integrity etc."The Court made these observations after noticing the unsatisfactory assistance given by the Public Prosecutor in a criminal appeal before the Punjab and Haryana High Court which led to the illegal sentencing of the accused.The Supreme Court was shocked to note that the High Court reversed the acquittals of the trial court in a revision petition filed by the father of the deceased, which is impermissible, as an acquittal cannot be reversed in a revision petition. The Court was aghast to note that the Public Prosecutor at the High Court, instead of pointing out the legal impermissibility, rather sought that the accused be given death penalty, when the State had not filed any appeal against the acquittal."Such is the standard of the Public Prosecutors in the High Courts of the country," the bench lamented.Duties of Public ProsecutorsThe judgment elaborated upon the duties of Public Prosecutors. "Public Prosecutor holds a "Public Office". The primacy given to him under the Scheme of CrPC has a "special purpose". Certain professional, official obligations and privileges are attached to his office. Prosecutor is not a part of investigating agency but is an "independent statutory authority". He holds an office of responsibility as he has been enclothed with the power to withdraw the prosecution of a case on the directions of the State Government." The Public Prosecutor must be a person of high merit, fair and objective, because upon him depends to a large extent the administration of criminal justice.The person appointed as Public Prosecutor must, therefore, be one who is not only able and efficient, but also enjoys a reputation and prestige which satisfy his appointment as a Public Prosecutor. The duty of the prosecutor is to assist the Court in reaching a proper conclusion in regard to the case which is brought before it for trial. The prosecutor has to be fair in the presentation of the prosecution case. He must not suppress or keep back from the court evidence relevant to the determination of the guilt or innocence of the accused. He must present the complete picture, and not a one sided picture. He must not be partial to the prosecution or to the accused. He has to be fair to both sides in the presentation of the case.Prosecutors must not show thirst to reach convictionThe judgment authored by Justice Pardiwala elaborated :"A Public Prosecutor is not expected to show a thirst to reach the case in the conviction of the accused somehow or the other irrespective of the true facts of the case. The expected attitude of the Public Prosecutor while conducting prosecution must be couched in fairness not only to the Court to the investigation agencies but to the accused as well. If an accused is entitled to any legitimate benefit during trial, the Public Prosecutor should not scuttle/conceal it. On the contrary, it is the duty of the Public Prosecutor to winch it to the fore and make it available to the accused. Even if the court or defence counsel overlooked it, the Public Prosecutor has the added responsibility to bring it to the notice of the Court, if it comes to his knowledge."The object of the CrPC and the Rules is to appoint the best among the lawyers as the Public Prosecutor to provide assistance to the Court. The people have a vital interest in the matteThe Court held that the State Government would be held liable for the faults made by the Public Prosecutors.In the present case, the Supreme Court asked the State of Haryana to pay a compensation of Rs 5 lakhs each to the three appellants who were wrongly convicted and sentenced to life for murder. Appearances : For Petitioner(s)- Ms. Indira Unninayar, AOR Mrs. Rukhsana Choudhury, Adv.For Respondent(s) Mr. Samar Vijay Singh, AOR; Ms. Sabarni Som, Adv; Mr. Keshav Mittal, Adv;Mr. Fateh Singh, Adv.Case : Mahabir and others vs State of HaryanaCitation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 121Click here to read the judgment

Govt Pleaders & Prosecutors Must Be Appointed On Merit; Not On Political Considerations Or Nepotism : Supreme Court

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

The Court stated that Public Prosecutors must assist the Court objectively without showing the "thirst" to secure conviction.

Tags