Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court on Monday directed the state government to provide a detailed data on the number of assistant public prosecutors (APPs)/special public prosecutors (appointed on tenure basis of three years) and appointed before December 2023 during the previous BRS government and how many of them are currently in service. The court also directed to furnish data of the remaining period of tenure of the said APPs and special prosecutors.
Justice N.V. Shravan Kumar was dealing with a batch of 13 petitions filed by terminated or removed APPs and special prosecutors by the present government through executive orders on the ground that they had been appointed by the previous BRS government and stating that they had violated the Model Code of Conduct during the elections by campaigning on behalf of the BRS.
Challenging the said termination orders and removals, the petitioners had approached the High Court in 2024 and, in some of the cases, the court gave interim relief by staying the executive orders. The petitioners argued that their services ended abruptly without any prior notice or no opportunity of hearing.
Senior Advocate V. Ravi Kiran Rao, representing the petitioners, contended that the terminations were violations to the procedure. He argued that the appointment of public prosecutors is different from appointment of government pleaders by the ruling parties. Citing Section 24(3) of the CrPC, he submitted that the appointment of public prosecutors was made in consultation of the District Judge. He also submitted that the district administrative wing only after scrutinising the eligibility and efficiency of the practicing advocates, the list will be sent to the District Judge for selection. Hence, it cannot be considered as political appointments and he also submitted that public prosecutors will only abide by the criminal procedures and they were answerable to the prosecution department.
The court asked the government to explain the basis for its decision in terminating them and whether due process was followed. It also sought clarity on a letter from the Director of Prosecutions that reportedly influenced the dismissals. The matter has been adjourned to Tuesday, September 23, with instructions for the state to file a comprehensive affidavit addressing all concerns raised.
