Law officers are appointed by state not based on merits, but on political allegiance: Madras high court

MADURAI: Madras high court has observed that it is deeply disturbing to note that the state appears to be appointing govt pleaders/public prosecutors/law officers not on merit, but on the basis of their proximity and allegiance to the ruling dispensation.

Justice B Pugalendhi observed that such appointments, at times, extended even to individuals whose only apparent qualification was their involvement in menial political activities like affixing posters during elections. The court said many such appointees lacked the requisite competence.

The judge observed that considering the manner in which cases were defended by political appointments, the first bench of the court had earlier issued directions to the state govt to formulate or frame definite guidelines for the manner and criteria for the selection of advocates to the post of govt law officers. It had directed appointment of law officers on the basis of merit. “However, the secretaries to the govt, who are involved in the selection process of the law officers, are sailing along with the govt by not identifying the right persons,” the judge said.

In primitive societies, the responsibility of protecting oneself against crime and punishing the offenders rested with the individuals. As society evolved into an organised political state governed by law, the power to investigate, prosecute and punish offences was taken away from private citizens and vested in the state. “Therefore, the state has a duty to defend the victim by appointing efficient govt pleaders/law officers,” the judge said.

The court made the observation while dismissing the petition filed by Rajkumar seeking suspension of sentence and to enlarge him on bail pending criminal appeal in the case. Rajkumar was sentenced to five years' rigorous imprisonment by a court in Theni for attempting to sexually assault a Scheduled Caste woman.

Justice Pugalendhi observed that this case was a glaring example as to how the victims were defended by political appointees in a case of rape and, that too, on a woman from the oppressed community. In this case, the accident register, a crucial document, was not marked before the trial court. The doctor was not examined properly regarding the same by the prosecution. It was reported that the document was not available in the records.

The law officer either deliberately evaded marking the document or was not equipped with the basic knowledge of conducting a criminal trial before the sessions court. The Director of Prosecution found that there was a lapse on the part of the law officer concerned and recommended removal of the law officer concerned in July 2025. However, the govt is yet to take a decision on the same. The judge directed the home secretary and Theni district collector to take a decision on the proposal sent by the Director of Prosecution in four weeks.


Ends MSID:: 130003616 413 |