New Delhi: The Delhi additional public prosecutors appointment issue has come under judicial scrutiny after a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) challenged a Delhi government notification that allows the recruitment of Additional Public Prosecutors (APPs) through deputation and short-term contractual engagement. The petition argues that the move may be inconsistent with provisions of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023. According to court proceedings, the High Court has sought a response from the Delhi government and scheduled further hearing in November. Delhi Additional Public Prosecutors Appointment: Delhi High Court Issues Notice To Delhi Government A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia recently issued notice to the Delhi government on the PIL challenging the appointment process for Additional Public Prosecutors (APPs). The Bench directed the government to file its response within two weeks. Read also: The Constitutional Principle Delhi High Court Says India Cannot Ignore The matter is expected to be heard again on November 4, when the Court will review the government's reply and the legal issues raised in the petition. What Does The PIL Challenge The petition challenges a notification dated April 2, 2026, which provides for filling APP posts through: 85% promotion quota 15% deputation or contractual engagement quota The PIL has been filed by advocate Shipra Mishra, who argues that the notification creates a separate route for recruitment from outside the regular prosecutorial cadre. Alleged Conflict With BNSS 2023 According to the petition, Section 18(6) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 requires Public Prosecutors and Additional Public Prosecutors to be appointed from the regular prosecuting officers' cadre where such a cadre exists. The plea contends that Delhi already has a functioning prosecutorial cadre and that the notification does not record any finding that suitable cadre officers are unavailable. Delhi Additional Public Prosecutors Appointment: Key Arguments Raised In The Petition The petitioner claims that allowing deputation and contractual appointments could create a parallel entry route into the prosecution service. The plea argues that such appointments may bypass the statutory framework intended for prosecutorial appointments. Constitutional Challenge The petition further alleges that the notification is arbitrary and may violate Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, which relate to equality before law and equal opportunity in public employment. The petitioner has requested the Delhi high Court to examine whether the notification is legally sustainable. Why Is Deputation A Key Issue Deputation generally refers to the temporary appointment of an employee from one department or organization to another for a specified period. Government services across India commonly use deputation for specialized or temporary staffing needs. Petitioner's Concerns According to the PIL, deputationists who are not part of the regular prosecution cadre may not have the same familiarity with local prosecutorial practices and procedures. The plea argues that this could potentially affect efficiency and consistency in criminal prosecution. Lawyers Appearing In The Matter The petitioner was represented by advocates: Dr Hemant Gupta Rony John Akash Aggarwal The Delhi government was represented by: Avnish Ahlawat Tania Ahlawat Nitesh Kumar Singh Aliza Alam Mohnish Sehrawat What Happens Next The Delhi High Court has not expressed any final view on the merits of the petition. At this stage, the Court has only sought a response from the Delhi government. The legal validity of the April 2026 notification will be examined after hearing all parties. Upcoming Hearing The next hearing is scheduled for November 4, when further arguments and the government's response are expected to be placed before the Court. Read also: Delhi High Court Lawyers Bills Case: Delhi High Court Flags Major Issues In Lawyers’ Payment System FAQs What Is The Main Argument Of The Petition? The petition argues that Section 18(6) of the BNSS, 2023 requires APPs to be appointed from the regular prosecutorial cadre when such a cadre exists. Why Has The Delhi High Court Issued Notice In This Case? The High Court issued notice after a PIL challenged the legality of a Delhi government notification allowing some Additional Public Prosecutor posts to be filled through deputation and contractual engagement. When Will The Delhi High Court Hear The Matter Again? The Delhi High Court is scheduled to hear the case again on November 4, after receiving the Delhi government's response.
