Delhi High Court Orders Reforms For Public Prosecutors' Facilities & Allowances
|The Delhi High Court recently issued a series of directives aimed at addressing various concerns of public prosecutors (PPs) in Delhi.
These directives were issued in response to a suo motu writ petition initiated by the Court concerning delays in filing appeals, with subsequent involvement by the Delhi Prosecutors Welfare Association to address their grievances.
A Division Bench of Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Manoj Jain laid out several significant orders:
Technological Facilities and Infrastructure: The government and Principal District & Sessions Judges across all districts of Delhi were instructed to provide appropriate technological facilities to public prosecutors, including office space. The Court directed, “Principal District & Sessions Judges of all districts of Delhi shall, if not already, provide requisite office space to Public Prosecutors posted in their respective districts. The space for office and creating e-library may be identified and approval be sought from of respective Building Maintenance & Construction Committee (BMCC), High Court of Delhi.”
Dress Allowance: Recognizing the requirement for public prosecutors to appear in court in prescribed robes throughout the year, the Court said, “This Court cannot be oblivious of the fact that Public Prosecutors are required to appear in the Court in robes and are required to wear the prescribed robe, including the black coat throughout the year and, therefore, it will be in the fitness of things if they are also granted dress allowance in the same manner. 32. Accordingly, we order that Public Prosecutors be given dress allowance @ Rs. 10,000/- per annum w.e.f. from date of the present order.”
Laptop and Tablet Allowance: The Court noted that public prosecutors receive ₹80,000 every five years for the purchase of laptops and tablets. The Court said, “as on date, Public Prosecutors are getting Rs. 80,000/-, in all, for purchasing of laptop and tablet which amount seems to be quite sufficient for enabling them for doing their office work with the help of these technological devices. 17. However, the prescribed life of such technological devices should be the same i.e. four years instead of five years as has been prescribed for Executive and Judicial Officers and the annual rate of depreciation should also be in terms of Office Memorandum No. F2/883/CTB/GAD/2012/3126-27 dated 24.09.2013 which is applicable to Executive and Judicial Officers.”
Qualification Incentives: The Delhi government was requested to consider granting incentives to encourage public prosecutors to pursue higher qualifications. The Court added, “we request GNCTD to consider such request regarding grant of incentive, either in lumpsum or by way of three advance increments, and to pass appropriate orders in this regard within six weeks from today.”
Security Considerations: Similar to provisions for judicial officers, the government was urged to assess security needs for public prosecutors, including the possibility of providing Personal Security Officers (PSOs) or equivalent arrangements.
Digital Libraries: It was mandated that digital libraries equipped with computers, printers, high-speed broadband, and subscriptions to e-journals and legal software be established for public prosecutors in every district of Delhi.
Camp Office Allowance: Public prosecutors of the rank of Assistant Public Prosecutors and above are entitled to a camp office allowance of ₹1.25 lakh once every five years.
Calendar Arrangements: Until a determination is made by the government regarding vacation periods for the prosecution department, prosecutors will follow the Delhi District Courts calendar, except during summer vacations when the Delhi government's calendar will apply.
Cadre Review: The ongoing cadre review of prosecutors was ordered to be completed within six weeks.
Cause Title: Court on its own motion v. State, [2024:DHC:5405-DB]
Appearance:
DPWA: Senior Advocate Ramesh Gupta along with advocates Ashish Dixit, Shailendra Singh, Harsh Choudhary, Ishaan Jain and KR Dogra
Respondent: Additional Standing Counsel Sanjeev Bhandari, Advocates Spriha Bhandari, Charu Sharma, Arijit Sharma and Vaibhav Vats.Click here to read/download Judgment