Delhi High Court Directs State Government To Finalize Proposals For Establishment Of Specialized Academy For Public Prosecutors
The Delhi High Court directed the Government of Delhi to finalize its proposal for the establishment of a specialized training institute for Public Prosecutors within 2 weeks.
The Court, in the previous order, was notified that 60 Public Prosecutors were appointed without providing them with any formal training. The Court had emphasized the important role played by Public Prosecutors in facilitating the administration of justice. The Court had observed that the Public Prosecutors must be trained to equip their distinct responsibilities.
The Bench headed by Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and comprising Justice Tushar Rao Gedela observed, “Furthermore, it has been brought to our notice that no affidavit has been filed by GNCTD in compliance of order dated 14.09.2023. Accordingly, they are granted an additional further two weeks’ time to comply with the aforesaid order”.
Advocate Krishan Kumar appeared for Delhi Prosecutors Welfare Association (DPWA) and Standing Counsel Santosh Kr. Tripathi for Rajiv Mehrishi/Respondents.
The Court was notified that 60 Public Prosecutors were appointed without imparting any formal training. The Court therefore, in its previous order, had directed the State Government to finalize their proposal for the establishment of a specialized training academy for Public Prosecutors.
The Court through its previous order had directed the Delhi State Government to assist the Central Government in facilitating the revision of the pay scales of Assistant Public Prosecutors. Additionally, the Court had also instructed to file a status report concerning (i) the implementation of direction regarding training programs, and (ii) the latest position of vacancies in respect of public prosecutors.
The Court, in its previous orders, noted, “The post of ‘Public Prosecutor’ is an integral part of criminal court system. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has on numerous occasions highlighted the import of the post,1 specifically highlighting its uniqueness vis-à-vis a counsel for a complainant or another ordinary party to a controversy. A Public Prosecutor is positioned as a representative of the sovereign, whose interest is not to secure a conviction but rather to facilitate the administration of justice, and in doing so must act in a fair and impartial manner, within the framework of the law and independent of undue influence by investigating agencies and the Executive. Given this distinct role played by Public Prosecutors, it becomes imperative that the appointees are adequately equipped to shoulder the weighty responsibilities the post carries”.
Accordingly, the Court listed the matter for December 6.
Cause Title: Delhi Prosecutors Welfare Association (Regd) v Rajiv Mehrishi & Anr
