A recent court ruling addressed whether a Rajya Sabha MP can concurrently serve as a Special Public Prosecutor (SPP). The accused argued it violates Article 102's 'office of profit' clause, but the court upheld the MP's appointment, highlighting the contractual nature of the SPP post and the state's prerogative in such appointments. This case tests the boundaries of constitutional disqualification for lawmakers holding state-appointed legal roles.
Exam Lens
Quick Exam Facts From News
1-Minute Revision
- ›Article Invoked: Article 102(1)(a) of Constitution
- ›Legal Provision Cited: CrPC Section 24
- ›Target this Legal Point: Article 102(1)(a) of the Constitution - disqualification for 'office of profit'.
- ›Target this Legal Point: Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) Section 24 - appointment of Public Prosecutors.
- ›Target this Case Law: Jaya Bachchan v. Union of India (2006) - definition of 'office of profit'.
- ›Target this Nodal Body: State Government's Law and Judiciary Department / Director of Prosecution - appoints SPPs.
Mastered this topic? Test your knowledge with a full MCQ quiz.
Practice exam-style questions, track your score, and strengthen your recall.