1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR -------------------------------------------------------- SPL. APPL. WRIT No. 230 of 2009 ANANDI DEVI & ORS V/S STATE OF RAJ. & ORS Mr. SANDEEP SHAH, for the appellant / petitioner Mr. RL JANGID, AAG, Mr. SG OJHA, for the respondent Date of Order : 10.7.2009 HON'BLE SHRI N P GUPTA,J. HON'BLE SHRI GOVIND MATHUR,J. ORDER ----- The appellant seeks to challenge the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 19.1.2009 dismissing the writ petition, which sought to challenge the appointment of Special Public Prosecutor. Learned Single Judge found that under Section 24(8), it is within the jurisdiction of State, and no person other than complainant can raise any voice against such appointment i.e. appointment of any person as Special Public Prosecutor. It has also been found that in this case accused, against whom challan has been filed are challenging the appointment made by the State, which has not been sustained. In our view, in view of the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Mukul Dalal & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors. reported in 1988 SCC (Cri) 566, which was a case precisely of challenging the appointment of Special Public Prosecutor only by the accused is a complete answer to the correctness of the findings recorded by the learned Single Judge. In that view of the matter, since the reasons given by the learned Single Judge cannot sustain, we are not able to sustain the impugned order. When the matter came before us on 3rd of July 2009 we realising this position orally directed Mr.Jangid, the 2 learned Addl.Advocate General, to make available for our perusal the original file of appointment of Special Public Prosecutor with a view to satisfy ourselves about the correctness or the propriety of the appointment of the Special Public Prosecutor. The file has been made available for our perusal. However, today Mr.Jangid submits that after going through the file, in his view the matter of appointment of Special Public Prosecutor in the present case including the question, as to whether Shri C.L.Soni should be appointed or any other person should be appointed, or Special Public Prosecutor should not be appointed at all, will be reconsidered by the State Government afresh in accordance with law on relevant and appropriate parameters as laid down by various case-laws decided by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the above matter. Obviously, in that view of the matter, since the matter is to be reconsidered by the State Government, no order is required to be passed by us expressly quashing the appointment of Shri C.L.Soni. The appeal is, accordingly, disposed of. ( GOVIND MATHUR ),J. ( N P GUPTA ),J. /tarun/