The Punjab and Haryana High Court has strongly criticised a woman Assistant District Attorney (ADA) posted in Panchkula for appearing as a government prosecutor in a criminal case against her own husband, without disclosing their relationship to the trial court.
Justice Archana Puri, who passed the order, observed that the ADA had failed to adhere to professional ethics and had not informed the court that the accused in the case was her spouse. The court directed that this conduct be brought to the notice of the District and Sessions Judge, Panchkula, with instructions to ensure that the concerned ADA does not appear as a government counsel in any case involving her husband.
Husband Sought Transfer of Maintenance Case
The order came in a petition filed by the husband, who had approached the High Court seeking the transfer of a child maintenance petition from Panchkula to Chandigarh. He alleged that his wife, being posted as an ADA in Panchkula, was misusing her position to influence the outcome of cases pending against him and to exert pressure.
To substantiate his claims, the petitioner produced documents showing that his wife had appeared multiple times as the prosecuting counsel in a sexual harassment case pending against him.
Wife Cited Staffing Gaps
In her response, the wife argued that she had appeared only as a “stop-gap arrangement” since other ADAs were on leave during those dates. However, the High Court was not convinced and expressed displeasure at the conduct of both parties.
“The wife should have immediately disclosed her relationship with the accused to the court, which she failed to do,” the court said. It added that her repeated appearances gave the impression that she was deliberately interfering in the matter.
High Court Displeased With Both Parties
Justice Puri also noted that both husband and wife appeared to be manipulating the legal system to harass each other. The court observed that they were trying to “mislead the courts as per their own convenience” and were seeking transfer of cases only to suit their personal interests.
While dismissing the husband’s plea for transfer of the case, the High Court directed the trial court in Panchkula to proceed with caution, given that the wife is posted there as an ADA.
