MADURAI: Observing that Public Prosecutors (PPs) and Government Law Officers (GLOs) play a vital role in the administration of criminal justice, the Madras High Court has said that appointments to such posts should be based on merit, legal competence and integrity rather than merely on the minimum years of practice prescribed under law.
Justice B Pugalendhi made the observations while closing two criminal appeals arising out of the rejection of two bail petitions in a case relating to the alleged assault on a Scheduled Caste activist over his efforts to retrieve Panchami land, following an order passed by the High Court on December 12, 2025, in respect of Keeranur village in Madurai district.
Within a week of the High Court's order on the activist's plea to restore Panchami land, the appellants, along with a few others, allegedly brutally attacked the activist and caused him grievous injuries on December 18, 2025. Having regard to the gravity of the allegations, the High Court, at that stage, did not consider it appropriate to decide the question of bail, and the matter was kept pending for consideration.
The subsequent bail applications were filed before the Sessions Court when the criminal appeals challenging the earlier rejection of bail were already pending before the High Court. However, neither the counsel for the accused nor the Public Prosecutor brought the pendency of the appeals to the notice of the Sessions Court. Consequently, the Sessions Court granted bail to the accused.
"The present case highlights the importance of ensuring that the State is effectively represented by competent prosecuting officers," the Court said.
Referring to the appointment of Public Prosecutors in district courts, the judge noted that the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) prescribes only a minimum of seven years' practice for Public Prosecutors and ten years' practice for Special Public Prosecutors, but does not lay down objective criteria such as legal acumen, drafting skills, integrity, behaviour and professional reputation.
The Court described Public Prosecutors as the "gatekeepers of the criminal justice system" and said they play a crucial role in protecting the rights of victims.
Justice Pugalendhi also referred to the First Bench decision in V Vasanthakumar vs State of Tamil Nadu, which had directed the State to evolve objective criteria for appointing Law Officers. The Court observed that appointments should strictly adhere to those standards and be based on demonstrable professional ability, competence and integrity rather than extraneous considerations.
The Court further observed that a Public Prosecutor is not expected merely to file lengthy written objections but must effectively assist the Court by identifying and presenting the material facts relevant to the issue under consideration. Effective advocacy, it said, lies in clarity, brevity and highlighting the decisive facts rather than the volume of pleadings.
The judgment also reiterated that once the High Court is seized of a bail matter, subordinate courts should ordinarily avoid entertaining subsequent bail applications unless there is a substantial change in circumstances, emphasising the need to maintain judicial discipline and prevent conflicting orders.