MP High Court Clarifies That Private Lawyers Cannot Take Over Prosecution During Criminal Trials

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has clarified that a private complainant or their lawyer cannot assume an active prosecutorial role during a sessions trial, emphasizing that criminal prosecutions must remain under the control and supervision of the Public Prosecutor. The ruling came while dismissing a revision petition filed by Shivpuri councillor Vijay Sharma, who had sought permission to actively assist the prosecution in a corruption case involving alleged irregularities in municipal development works.

The case originated from a complaint submitted in July 2025 by 21 municipal councillors alleging poor road construction, false reporting of completed civic works, and misuse of public funds in Shivpuri. Following an inquiry ordered by the District Collector, an FIR was registered against certain municipal officials and a contractor under provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Prevention of Corruption Act.

After the filing of the charge sheet, Sharma approached the trial court seeking permission under Section 338(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita to assist the prosecution. However, the plea was rejected on the ground that he did not qualify as a “victim” entitled to a broader participatory role in the proceedings.

Upholding the trial court’s decision, the Division Bench of Justice G.S. Ahluwalia and Justice Pushpendra Yadav observed that criminal trials before Sessions Courts are legally required to be conducted by Public Prosecutors. The Court clarified that private counsel may only submit written arguments after the completion of evidence and cannot cross-examine witnesses or make oral submissions during trial proceedings. The Bench further noted that merely initiating a complaint leading to an FIR does not automatically grant a complainant expanded prosecutorial rights in a criminal case.