KOCHI: Setting at rest all speculations, the Kerala High Court on Friday upheld the appointment of Advocate T Asaf Ali as the Director-General of Prosecution (DGP) and State Public Prosecutor (SPP).A Division Bench comprising acting Chief Justice C N Ramachandran Nair and Justice P S Gopinathan passed the order by dismissing a petition filed by Advocate E A Thankappan seeking a directive to quash the appointment of Asaf Ali as the DGP and SPP. The HC had earlier directed the state government to keep in abeyance the order appointing Ali as DGP.The petitioner alleged that the appointment of DGP is not in accordance with section 25 A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which requires a concurrence of the Chief Justice of the High court.“The argument that the appointment of DGP based on an executive order issued by the government requires the concurrence of the Chief Justice lack merit,” the court held.Appearing for the state, Advocate-General K P Dandapani argued that the appointment of Asaf Ali as the DGP was not in exercise of the powers under Section 25 A of the CrPC but in pursuant to the exercise of the executive power of the state under the constitution of India.The petitioner further alleged that the appointment of Ali as State Public Prosecutor was against section 24(1) of CrPC or violation of the rules of appointment of government law officers including SPP.“Ali’s appointment as SPP was approved by the judges of the HC on the administration side and there is no dispute on the issue. As far as eligibility of Ali is concerned, he has 29 years of practice as a lawyer in the District Court at Thalassery,” the court said adding that the qualification to become PP, is being an advocate who is practicing for not less than seven years. Ali has 29 years of practice to his credit and he is a distinguished lawyer, the court said.The Advocate-General argued that Asaf Ali should be treated as an advocate with the required years of practice in-terms of rules and based on the Apex court verdict.“The appointment of PP is subject to scrutiny of the HC. When the HC on administrative side approved the appointment, the same cannot be questioned on the ground that the candidate is not qualified by virtue of not being an advocate with five yeas practice in the HC,” the court said.
Comments
0 comment