Mumbai: The Maharashtra government has made major changes to the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973, decentralising the government and police power to appoint special public prosecutors, simplifying procedures, allowing for the digital serving of summons, among others.
A total of 29 amendments were approved by Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis on Thursday and will be placed before the State Cabinet in a fortnight for approval. The changes have been necessitated following a backlog of cases and complaints of public prosecutors (PPs) acting like a ‘post office’ for the government in many cases.
Both the Centre and the State can amend the CrPC as the procedural law falls in the Concurrent List. This is not the first time Maharashtra has amended the CrPC, officials said.
Among the key changes are amendment to Section 24 (8-A), related to the appointment of the special public prosecutor (SPP). District Magistrates will now be allowed to approve appointment of the SPP on the recommendation of the Superintendent of Police or Commissioner of Police.
The powers have so far remained with the State government, District Magistrate and various higher courts. Under the section, public prosecutors in high courts and district courts are appointed by the Central or State government. “The duties of a public prosecutor must be to act impartially, fairly and truthfully but in the recent past, there have been complaints with regard to their ethics and conduct. We wanted to decentralise this power,” said a senior official in the Maharashtra Law Department.
Another significant amendment is to Section 244, which allows courts to initiate a preliminary inquiry of prosecution in warrant cases [tried by a magistrate] based on “otherwise than a police report". This can now also be done on the basis of “a complaint filed by a public servant of Central or State investigating agencies”. This will quicken the institution of a preliminary inquiry by courts in major corruption cases and summon the accused as early as possible, officials said.
Several other sections related to punitive fines, seizure of properties and maintenance benefits have been changed to increase the fine and charges.
To simplify the trial procedures, Section 126 has been amended to allow digital transmission of summons and documents, allowing the accused to appear before the court through an electronic video linkage. “In this regard (framing of charges via a video link), we have amended Sections 228 and 240 among others,” an official said.
Senior lawyers welcomed the changes but said they must synchronise with the amendments being made to the CrPC in other states, especially in cases of serious offences. “These amendments must be made uniformly across the country. For example, anticipatory bail has different provisions in Maharashtra as compared to Uttar Pradesh, where one has to file a writ to initiate it,” said Sujay Kantawala, senior advocate in the Bombay High Court.
Special Public Prosecutor Pradeep Gharat said the the increased use of technology will help trials and investigations. “Generally, prosecutors who have knowledge of the Act are required; the regular prosecutor may not be aware of all the provisions of the Act. Therefore, experts are required and the present procedure involves too many technicalities, which needed to be simplified. So this is a good step.”
Special Public Prosecutor Ujjwal Nikam said, “The public prosecutor is neither meant for conviction nor acquittal, so he is supposed to be neutral. If a public prosecutor is appointed as per the request of the police, then the PP might say the accused must be convicted. The PP has to play a fair role. He should not be a persecutor but a prosecutor.”
Former Director General of Police Praveen Dixit said the changes were welcome. “Particularly the fact that public prosecutors can now be appointed on the CP’s or SP’s recommendation will benefit the investigation to a great extent. In the earlier system, the police had to approach the government for this. Now, the public prosecutors can be involved right from the FIR stage, as the trial often starts with the defence lawyers picking out flaws in the FIR itself, and guide the investigating team in conducting a thorough investigation and framing a watertight chargesheet. This will be beneficial especially in sensational or serious cases,” Mr. Dixit said.
