New Delhi, The Delhi High Court on Friday stayed an order of the city government mandating public prosecutors in trial courts to mark their attendance daily through the Aadhaar Enabled Biometric Attendance System .
Justice Amit Mahajan issued notice on a petition by the Delhi Prosecutors' Welfare Association challenging the order issued by the Delhi government's Directorate of Prosecution on October 5.
According to the directive, all prosecuting officers must mark daily attendance on the biometric attendance machine or on their mobile phones through the attendance App at their respective district court complex/office of the district in-charge.
The petitioner, represented by senior advocates N Hariharan, Ashish Mohan and Sacchin Puri, contended that public prosecutors and additional public prosecutors are officers of the court, appointed under sections 18 and 19 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, and their presence is recorded daily in the judicial order sheets.
The government order asking them to compulsorily register and mark attendance through the AEBAS was, therefore, unreasoned, arbitrary, contrary to the law on Aadhaar and the right to privacy, it was argued.
"The work of a prosecuting officer is court-centric. Courts commence at 10:00 A.M.; before that, the prosecuting officer confers with investigating officers, scrutinises police files, verifies the presence of witnesses and prepares remand and bail matters, and thereafter remains in court until it rises," the petition said.
{{/usCountry}}"The work of a prosecuting officer is court-centric. Courts commence at 10:00 A.M.; before that, the prosecuting officer confers with investigating officers, scrutinises police files, verifies the presence of witnesses and prepares remand and bail matters, and thereafter remains in court until it rises," the petition said.
{{/usCountry}}"A rigid attendance regime not only imposes an unreasonable administrative burden upon chief public prosecutors to account for routine court-related movements, but also has the potential to divert prosecuting officers from their primary judicial functions and cause avoidable delays in remand, bail and trial proceedings, thereby adversely affecting the expeditious administration of criminal justice and the constitutional guarantee of speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution of India," it added.
The plea said the authorities earlier rejected the petitioner's representation against the AEBAS attendance, stating that it was devoid of merit and marking attendance was necessary.
Lawyers Kushal Kumar, Aditya Kapoor, Rishabh Saxena and Harsh Ahuja also appeared for the petitioner.
The matter would be heard next in December.
This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.