Delhi HC asks LG to respond to Delhi govt's plea challenging move to allow police's choice of lawyers

The Delhi government has challenged the LG's decision allowing Delhi Police chosen lawyers as SPPs to appear and conduct prosecution in cases relating to violence during the farmers' tractor rally on January 26 this year and North-east Delhi riots cases of February 2020.

New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Friday issued a notice to the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi seeking his reply on a plea by the AAP government challenging the decision to allow police chosen lawyers as special public prosecutors (SPP) for cases related to this year's Republic Day violence and last year's riots on the grounds that it will not be in the interest of "fair trial".

The Delhi government has challenged the LG's decision allowing Delhi Police chosen lawyers as SPPs to appear and conduct prosecution in cases relating to violence during the farmers' tractor rally on January 26 this year and north-east Delhi riots cases of February 2020.

The Delhi government had said the ''appointment of SPPs'' is a routine matter and not an exceptional one for which reference to the President can be made and that the LG had no sound reason for referring the matter to the President when the government had agreed to appoint independent SPPs.

A bench of Chief Justice D N Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh has listed the matter for further hearing on October 21.

READ:Unfair to seek documents for providing aid to orphans: Delhi HC

The Delhi government has challenged the LG’s July 23 order by which he has invoked the proviso to Article 239-AA(4) of the Constitution to refer to the President the matter of appointment of Delhi Police’s chosen advocates as SPPs in cases related to the farmers’ agitation and February 2020 riots in North-East Delhi, which the decision of the President is pending.

It said the SPPs are taking charge of the matters by displacing the regular public prosecutors and therefore, urgent directions are required from the court to enable them to continue so as to not jeopardise fair trial in the cases.

The petition has also challenged the July 26 notification appointing the SPPs to conduct the cases and also the Centre's August 4 order endorsing the LG’s view and approving the appointments.

It contended that the appointed is contrary to established legal principles and violates the constitutional guarantee of a fair trial.

AGENCY INPUTS