Framing Of Charges And The Role Of The Public Prosecutor: A Comparative Study Of Common Law Jurisdictions
- IJLLR Journal
- Nov 11
- 1 min read
Updated: Nov 12
Muskaan, LL.M, University Institute of Legal Studies, Chandigarh University
Ms. Parneet Kaur, Associate Professor, University Institute of Legal Studies, Chandigarh University
ABSTRACT
The Public Prosecutor (PP) has a strong and important place in criminal cases, standing as the main person who decides on charges. This choice power, though useful for law working with flexibility, makes a clear struggle between government power and the rights of the accused. This paper looks at how this power of the prosecutor is handled in four common law countries: India, the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada. The study looks at how each country controls the charging step, from the U.S. model, where prosecutors have very wide power, to the U.K. system, where the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) runs it with a strict two-step rule. It also looks at Canada’s mixed style, where Crown prosecutors check charges made by police, and India, where judges set charges but the PP still has a strong effect. By seeing how much choice power exists, what checks there are, and how courts review it, the research shows the different ways to keep prosecutor freedom while still holding fairness, balance, and due process. The results indicate that countries with open rules and public tests of interest, like the U.K. and Canada, have stronger systems to stop unfair or biased charge decisions, leading to a fairer justice system.
Keywords: Prosecutorial Discretion, Framing of Charges, Common Law Systems, Comparative Criminal Law, Public Prosecutor.
