To put an end to unnecessary and frivolous appeals and spending of the taxpayers’ money, the Bombay high court has laid down guidelines for the state government.
The court observed that was a “disturbing factor” that the state filed appeals as a matter of routine without applying its mind.
The state government was seeking to file an appeal against acquittal in a murder case. The court rejected the state’s application after it was held that there is no scope for appeal.
A division bench of justice BR Gavai and justice Shrihari Davare said they could understand if the state was filing the applications for seeking permission to appeal in cases where there was some scope for interference.
“However, when there is no material at all, the state still prefers an application to appeal,” the court noted.
“Apart from the fact that the state is expected to be a model litigant, the expenses of filing such proceedings are borne by the tax payers,” the court pointed out.
“Not only that, but, the valuable time of the courts as well as the public prosecutors are wasted in such unnecessary exercise.”
The court said such unwarranted challenges to acquittal added to the already heavily burdened courts.
The judges have ordered that after the trial court delivers a judgment, the additional public prosecutor concerned should personally go through the judgment. If he is convinced that that the view taken by the court is either perverse or impossible, a recommendation can be made for filing of appeal.
The secretary or the joint secretary of the law and judiciary department should then verify the proposal and take a call on whether to file an appeal or not.
Once a proposal is received by the high court public prosecutor’s office, the evidence should be gone through once again and an opinion should be communicated to the secretary or joint secretary. They shall then deicide on filing the appeal.
The court said it will hold the secretary or the prosecutor responsible if the appeal had been filed mindlessly.