R N TIWARI Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is being prosecuted for an offence under Section 395 IPC before the Court of the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Durg, in Sessions Trial No. 25 of 1989. Respondent No. 3, B.P. Agarwal, Advocate, has been appointed a Special Public Prosecutor, in exercise of power under Section 24(8), Cr. P.C. This order (Annexure-A) has been passed by the District Magistrate, but appears to have been signed for him by some Addl. District Magistrate. THE petitioner took an objection as to the appointment of respondent No. 3 as Special Public Prosecutor. By the impugned order, the learned Additional Sessions Judge rejected that objection, on the ground that the objection was not taken before the proceedings commenced and the hearing was done on the question of framing of charge and that such a challenge cannot be made before him. To us, both the reasons assigned for rejecting the objection appear to be irrelevant. Section 24(8) Cr. P.C. is as follows :-

(2.) WE accordingly allow this petition and quash the order of appointment of respondent No. 3, as Special Public Prosecutor (Annexure-A), to conduct Sessions Trial No. 23 of 1989, pending before the Court of the 1st Addl. Sessions Judge, Durg. Petition allowed.