MARY JOOSA Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to the respondents to appoint a Special Public Prosecutor to conduct session Case which was at that time at the preliminary stage before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, North Parvur. She had issued Ext. P1 notice seeking appointment of a Special prosecutor and she had also forwarded the consent of the advocate of her choice. Now, it is disclosed in C. M. P. 7919/1997 that the Government had issued ext. P6 order, based on the notice directing the District Collector to entrust the case to the District Government Pleader. Now, the case is being tried as s. C. 42/96 of Sessons Court, paravur. It is stated that it is later transferred to IVth Additional Sessions court, Ernakulam. So, the petitioner sought to amend the original petition impugning Ext. P6 as well.

(2.) THE petitioner's son succumbed to injuries while he was in a hospital. He sustained injuries from a policemen, according to the petitioner. THE policeman inflicted brutal attack on the body of his son. Crime branch investigated the case. Investigation revealed that it was a case of murder. THE petitioner submits that in order to attain justice for the petitioner, petitioner forwarded a representation by way of a notice before the respondents under S. 24 (6) of the Code of Criminal Procedure to appoint an advocate of the petitioner's choice as a Special Prosecutor to conduct prosecution in this murder case. That is the basis for the petitioner's request for appointment of a Special Prosecutor. Appointment of Special Prosecutor is governed by S. 24 (6) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. It reads as under : "the Central Government or the State Government may appoint for the purpose of any case or class of cases a person who has been in practice as an Advocate for not less than ten years as a Special prosecutor. " This reveals that it is the absolute discretion of the concerned Government to appoint a Special Prosecutor taking into account the nature of the case or the public interest involved in the case. It had been made clear by this Court in the decision reported in Abdul Khadar v. Government of Kerala, 1992 (2) KLT 948 that, "a Special Prosecutor is not to be appointed in ordinary circumstances. Special Prosecutor could be appointed only when public interest demands it and not to vindicate the grievances of a private person, such as close relation of the deceased. " In this case, the petitioner has not disclosed any public interest demanding appointment of a Special Prosecutor. Even then, the government considered the matter and took interest in instructing the District collector to entrust the case to the District Government Pleader himself to conduct it. That will sufficiently safegard the interest of the prosecution.