Delhi High Court: In a case which was inherently for the revision of pay scales of Assistant Public Prosecutors, the Division Bench of Satish Chandra Sharma, C.J. and Sanjeev Narula, J., directed Government of Delhi to coordinate with Delhi Judicial Academy to conduct training of the newly recruited public prosecutors, and file a status report regarding the implementation of direction regarding training programmes, and the latest position of vacancies in respect of public prosecutors. A letter dated 13-09-2023 issued by the Government of India to Anil Soni, Central Government Standing Counsel, was brought to the notice of this Court by Chetan Sharma, ASG, informing that the matter in respect of revision of pay scales of Assistant Public Prosecutors was under active consideration of Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India. Further it was stated that the Union of India had requested the Chief Secretary, Government of Delhi to provide ‘total financial implication’ for revision of pay scales of Assistant Public Prosecutors working under the Directorate of Prosecution, Government of Delhi, as per their proposal.
The Court granted Union of India four weeks’ time to respond and provide necessary information as requested. The Court noted that sixty public prosecutors had been appointed recently, however, no training had been imparted to them. The Court opined that the post of ‘Public Prosecutor’ was an integral part of criminal court system and that the Supreme Court had on numerous occasions highlighted the importance of the post, specifically highlighting its uniqueness vis-à-vis a counsel for a complainant or another ordinary party to a controversy. The Court further opined that a Public Prosecutor was positioned as a representative of the sovereign, whose interest was 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.
The Court directed Government of Delhi to coordinate with the Delhi Judicial Academy to conduct training of the newly recruited public prosecutors, and file a status report before next date of hearing regarding:
-
the implementation of direction regarding training programmes, and
-
the latest position of vacancies in respect of public prosecutors.
The matter would next be listed on 01-11-2023.
[Delhi Prosecutors Welfare Association v. Rajiv Mehrishi, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 5814, Order dated 14-09-2023]
*Judgement authored by — Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Sanjeev Narula
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For the Petitioner: Mr. Ashish Dixit, Advocate. Mr. Krishan Kumar, Mr. Shivam Bedi, Ms. Gargi Singh, Advocates with Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Mr. Kumar Sanjay, APP, Mr. Rajeev K. Virmani, Amicus Curiae, Ms. Deveshi Madan, Ms. Gunjan Soni, Advocates, Mr. Ashish Dixit, Mr. Additya Kapoor, Mr. Kushal Kumar, Mr. Akash Gupta, Ms. Garima Saxena, Advocates.
For the Respondents: Mr. Chetan Sharma, ASG, Mr. Anil Soni, Mr. Ajay Digpual, CGSC, Mr. Amit Gupta, Ms. Swati Kwatra, Mr. Vinay Yadav, Mr. Devvrat Yadav, Mr. Kamal Digpual, Mr. Vikramaditya Singh, Mr. Ghanshyam Jha, Advocates, Mr. Anuj Aggarwal, ASC, Mr. Arshya Singh, Mr. Yash Upadhyay, Ms. Ayushi Bansal, Advocates, Mr. Gaurav Agrawal, Mr. Manan Daga, Advocates, Mr. Jamshed Ansari, APP, Ms. Mehak Nakra, ASC, Mr. Ashish Dixit, Advocate, Mr. Santosh Kr. Tripathi, Mr. Arun Panwar, Mr. Pradhyumn Rao, Mr. Utkarsh Singh, Mr. Kartik Sharma, Ms. Prashansa Sharma, Mr. Rishabh Srivastava, Mr. Chetan Sharma, ASG, Mr. Anil Soni, Mr. Amar Nath, Advocates.
