NEW DELHI: Voicing concerns over the “declining standards” of public prosecutors, the Supreme Court on Wednesday urged state governments to avoid appointing them based solely on political considerations.
The Supreme Court emphasized that the role of a public prosecutor is a public position, and therefore, should be filled exclusively by skilled and reputable lawyers with established integrity.
The Court highlighted an instance where a prosecutor failed to address a critical mistake made by the Punjab & Haryana High Court that resulted in the wrongful conviction of three individuals. The Supreme Court remarked, “This reflects the poor standard of public prosecutors in High Courts… Such situations are inevitable when state governments select Advocates General (AGPs) and Additional Public Prosecutors (APPs) based on political favoritism. Nepotism and partiality further undermine merit.”
The judgment serves as a clear message to all state governments, stressing that AGPs and APPs in their respective High Courts should be chosen purely based on individual merit. The Court stated that it is the responsibility of the state government to evaluate the capabilities of these legal professionals, including their knowledge of the law, personal backgrounds, and integrity.
“Law officers constitute a vital part of the judicial framework, collaborating with judges to achieve the essential goal of justice against wrongdoers. The primary aim of the state is to prevent crime, carry out investigations, prosecute offenders, and impose appropriate penalties to maintain law and order, societal harmony, and peace. The various provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) and relevant rules articulate how public prosecutors should be appointed to assist the courts effectively. The intent of the CrPC and these rules is to ensure that the most capable lawyers are appointed as public prosecutors to aid the judiciary,” the Supreme Court noted.
