Appointments to public offices should be guided by competence, integrity and professional ability and not by recommendations or other extraneous considerations, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has said.
Justice B. Pugalendhi said the legal profession today has many advocates, including young members of the Bar, possessing exceptional legal knowledge, sound advocacy skills and impeccable professional standards. Merit should receive due recognition.
The objective of the selection process should always be to identify the candidates who are best equipped to represent the State and assist the court, the judge said.
The court said the Law Commission of India in its 197th report on Public Prosecutor’s Appointments has noted that any method of appointment which sacrifices the quality of the prosecution or which enables State governments to make appointments at their choice without proper screening, proper assessment of the qualifications, experience or integrity of the individuals, will lead to arbitrariness.
Considering the important role played by the Public Prosecutors and Special Public Prosecutors in protecting the rights of the victims and the recommendations of the Law Commission, the court is of the opinion that the guidelines issued should also be considered when appointing public prosecutors to the District Courts and Special Courts, the court said.
The court made the observations while hearing the criminal appeals filed by Chinnadurai and Maharajan of Madurai district. The two accused along with others had brutally attacked a Scheduled Caste man Muthuraja who had raised the issue pertaining to restoration of about 190.74 acres of Panchami lands in Keeranur village in Melur in Madurai district. According to him, the lands were under illegal occupation.
When the criminal appeals against the rejection of bail were pending before the High Court, The Third Additional District and Sessions Court (PCR) granted bail. The court was told that the pendency of the criminal appeals was not brought to the notice of the Third Additional District and Sessions Court (PCR).
The Special Public Prosecutor, who appeared before the Third Additional District and Sessions Court (PCR) filed an affidavit stating that he had filed a detailed written objection opposing the grant of bail and specifically referred to the pendency of the criminal appeals before the High Court.
The purpose of the observations is to emphasise certain institutional principles which are essential for the proper administration of criminal justice. Effective advocacy, fair assistance by the prosecution, adherence to judicial discipline and careful exercise of judicial discretion are indispensable to the administration of justice. It is only when every stakeholder faithfully performs the duty cast upon him that public confidence in the criminal justice system can be sustained, the judge said and closed the criminal appeals.
Published – July 08, 2026 11:06 pm IST
