Cr.P.C. S.167: Private Counsel in State Case? No vested right is granted to a complainant or informant or aggrieved party to directly conduct a prosecution. So far as the Magistrate is concerned, cmoparative latitude is given to him but he must always bear in mind that while the prosecution must remain robust and comprehensive and effective it should not abandon the need to be free, fair and diligent. So far as the Sessions Court is conerned, it is the Public Prosecutor who must at all times remain in control of the prosecution and a counsel of a priavate party can only assist the public prosecutor in discharging its responsibility. The complainant or informant or aggrieved party may, however, be heard at a curcial and critical juncture of the Trial so that his interests in the prosecution are not prejudiced or jeopardized. Constant or even frequest interferance in the prosecution should not be encouraged as it will have a deleterious impact on its impartiality. If the Magistrate or Sessions Judge harbours the opinion that the prosecution is likey to fail, prudence would prompt that the complainant or informant or aggrieved party be given an informal hearing-Sundeep Kumar Bafna Vs. State of Maharashtra, AIR 2014 SC 1745.
Forums
- Africa, Land People and Story
- Asia
- Civil Law Discourse
- Corporate and Investment Discourse
- Criminal Law Discourse
- Dictionary, Glossary and Vocabulary
- Education and Education Laws
- Environment and Climate Justice
- Europe
- Family Law Discourse
- General Laws Discourse
- India, Culture and Governance
- Indian Supreme Court Cases
- Intellectual Property
- International and Multinational Discourse
- Jurists and Jurisprudence
- Law and Judicial Examinations
- Money, Security and Banking
- North America
- Religion, Dharma, Church and Umma
- Science and Philosophy
- Social and Cultural Discourse
- South America
- Trade and Industry
- UNO, Security Council and other Organs