Section 19 BNSS: Assistant Public Prosecutors (Formerly Section 25 CrPC)

Section 19 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023: Assistant Public Prosecutors

Official Bare Act Text

Override / Mandate Mens Rea (Intent) Actus Reus (Conduct) Punishment Limitation Monetary

(1) The State Government shall appoint in every district one or more Assistant Public Prosecutors for conducting prosecutions in the Courts of Magistrates.

(2) The Central Government may appoint one or more Assistant Public Prosecutors for the purpose of conducting any case or class of cases in the Courts of Magistrates.

(3) Without prejudice to provisions contained in sub-sections (1) and (2), where no Assistant Public Prosecutor is available for the purposes of any particular case, the District Magistrate may appoint any other person to be the Assistant Public Prosecutor in charge of that case after giving notice of fourteen days to the State Government:

Provided that no police officer shall be eligible to be appointed as an Assistant Public Prosecutor, if he—

(a) has taken any part in the investigation into the offence with respect to which the accused is being prosecuted; or

(b) is below the rank of Inspector.

Statutory Defined Terms in this Section: (Click any term for official legal definition)

Charge Sec 2(1)(b) Investigation Sec 2(1)(h) Public Prosecutor Sec 2(1)(r)

Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 19

Section 19 mandates the appointment of Assistant Public Prosecutors (APPs) by the State Government in every district for conducting prosecutions in the Courts of Judicial Magistrates.

Magisterial Prosecutions: State Government appoints one or more Assistant Public Prosecutors for conducting trials before Judicial Magistrates.
Police Officer Disqualification: No police officer can be appointed as an Assistant Public Prosecutor.
Ad-Hoc Exception Safeguards: In exceptional vacancies where no APP is available, a police officer not below the rank of Inspector who did not investigate the case may be assigned by the DM.

Key Landmark Precedents:

S.B. Shahane v. State of Maharashtra (1995) Supp 3 SCC 37: The Supreme Court issued mandatory directions requiring State Governments to constitute an independent cadre of Assistant Public Prosecutors completely separated from the Police Department.
Ram Narain v. State of U.P. (1973) 2 SCC 86: Emphasised that investigating police officers cannot prosecute their own cases, as institutional bias compromises fair trial guarantees under Article 21.

Courtroom Practice & Strategic Litigation Guidance:

If a police head constable or sub-inspector who participated in the investigation attempts to conduct the prosecution before the magistrate, raise an immediate objection under Section 19(2). Investigating officers are strictly barred.