Indore (Madhya Pradesh): Indore Bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court has set aside the appointment of a special public prosecutor in a criminal case, holding that such an appointment cannot be made merely at the request of a private complainant and must be supported by special or compelling circumstances.
A division bench comprising Justice Vijay Kumar Shukla and Justice Alok Awasthi allowed a writ appeal filed by Ratlam-based Sanjana Chouhan, challenging the order appointing a special public prosecutor under Section 24(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure in Crime No. 9/2016.
The HC quashed the July 18, 2019, order appointing the special public prosecutor, as well as the July 23, 2025, order of the single judge that had dismissed the petitioner’s writ petition. The Bench observed that the impugned appointment order did not record any reasons justifying the need for a special public prosecutor and was passed solely on the request of the complainant, which is impermissible in law.
Emphasising that a public prosecutor represents the State and must act fairly, objectively and independently, the HC held that appointment of a special public prosecutor is an exception and not the rule. Relying on the Supreme Court’s judgment in Mukul Dalal vs Union of India (1988), the Bench noted that no material was placed on record to show that the case involved any complexity or sensitivity warranting such an appointment.
However, the HC clarified that proceedings already conducted by the special public prosecutor would not be nullified. Liberty was granted to the State to appoint a prosecutor afresh in accordance with law, if so advised.
