- (1.) By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has invoked the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of certiorari for the quashment of: (i) impugned order dated 16.05.2008 passed and issued by opposite party No. 1 namely the State of U.P., through its Principal Secretary (Home), appointing opposite party No. 3, as Special Public Prosecutor, in Sessions Trial No. 341/07 under Section 302/120B IPC on the ground that the said order not only runs contrary to provisions of Sections 24 and 301 of Cr.P.C., and executive instructions as contained in U.P. L.R. Manual, but it is also violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, and (ii) the subsequent criminal proceedings conducted with the assistance and participation of opposite party No. 3, the Special Public Prosecutor. Besides, it is also prayed that opposite party No. 3 be restrained/prohibited from appearing as Special Public Prosecutor in the aforesaid Sessions Trial (No. 341/07).
(2.) As per the prosecution case, it appears that one Virendra Singh lodged first information report at police station concerned that on 21.09.2006 at about 10.00 A.M., when his younger brother Chandra Pal Singh, deceased herein, Manager of Lucknow Public School, arrived at the gate of the college, he was shot at by some miscreants who indulged and caused indiscriminate firing, and thus rushed to hospital. However, the doctors declared him 'brought dead'. During the course of investigation it was revealed that the petitioner and one other person namely S.B. Singh had hired 2 shooters namely Ranvir Singh and Anand Kumar Verma, who caused the death of deceased by firing at him.
(3.) It also appears that opposite party No. 3, a designated senior advocate of this Court, who had earlier appeared for complainant to oppose bail application of accused persons, was appointed as Special Public Prosecutor for the trial of this case with the condition that the professional fee of the said Special Public Prosecutor was to be paid by Lokesh Singh, opposite party No. 4 herein (son of deceased C.P. Singh). The said order was challenged by way of this writ petition. But during the pendency of the writ petition, the order of appointment was modified/withdrawn and now the fee is being paid by the State Government. It also appears that the amended order has also been sought to be challenged by way of an amendment application.;