B BHASKAR REDDY Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this case, the Additional Public Prosecutor attached to the Court of the Second Additional Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam, has authorised Sri S.L. Prasad, Additional Public Prosecutor of another Court, to conduct the prosecution in Sessions Case No. 17 of 1990 on the file of the Second Additional Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam. The accused has filed a memo in that Court objecting to the prosecution being conducted by Sri S.L. Prasad. The learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam, has stated in his order dated 11-10-1990 that, in view of the memo filed by the Additional Public Prosecutor and a petition by the advocate for the accused, the memo is closed. This revision case is filed against the said order.

(2.) The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that when there is a Public Prosecutor attached to the Court of the Second Additional Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam, he alone shall conduct the prosecution in the cases arising in that Court, but he cannot delegate that function to any other Advocate. His further contention is that, if for any reason, the Public Prosecutor is incapacitated from conducting the prosecution, the State Government has to appoint a Special Public Prosecutor under sub-section (8) of Section 24 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(3.) Section 225 of the Code of Criminal Procedure lays down that in every trial before a Court of Session, the prosecution shall be conducted by a Public Prosecutor. Public Prosecutor is defined in Section 2 (u) of the Code of Criminal Procedure as "any person appointed under Section 24, and includes any person acting under the directions of a Public Prosecutor". Relying on this uefinition, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has contended that the definition "Public Prosecutor" includes any person acting under the directions of a Public Prosecutor, and so, the person who is acting under the directions of the Public Prosecutor also well come within the definition.