SC grants 10 days to states to file reply
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court of India on Tuesday granted one last opportunity to those states which have not filed their counter reply and asked them to file affidavits within 10 days in response to its order regarding safety and security of arrangements for Judges and court complexes.
A three-judge bench of the apex court, headed by the Chief Justice of India Nuthalapati Venkata Ramana, and also comprising Justice Surya Kant and Justice Aniruddha Bose, was hearing the Suo Motu Cognizance (SMC) case involving the alleged death of ASJ (Additional Sessions Judge) Dhanbad, of Jharkhand, Uttam Anand.
“We are giving one last chance to those States which have not filed their reply yet,” the CJI said and fixed the matter for further hearing after filing of the reply.
The Supreme Court was apprised on Tuesday that Assam has given the details of security arrangements. Jharkhand and Gujarat filed their reply on Monday, after complying with the top court’s order regarding the safety and security of various arrangements for Judges and court complexes in their states.
The Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta, senior law officer appearing for the Union of India (UOI) said that the Centre has repeatedly asked states to create a dedicated force for the protection of judges and court complexes. The apex court said that the Centre can ensure its guidelines are implemented. Mehta said that the Union home secretary will convene a meeting of Director Generals of Police (DGPs ) or state home secretaries on this aspect.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday said that many states have so far failed to file their reply despite chances were given to them. The top court noted that states like Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, and West Bengal had so far failed to file their affidavits. The apex court told the SG, Mehta that he is the best person to tackle the situation. “You (Mehta) have to resolve the issue,” the top court said.
Mehta said that if the SC can consider as to what is the actual picture of the state High Courts as far as the safety aspects are concerned, in their respective states, and for that the Registrar Generals may be asked, but the Supreme Court will, however, have to take a decision on it.
The Supreme Court refused to pass any order on it. Senior lawyer, Mannan Kumar Mishra, appearing for the BCI (Bar Council of India), sought a week’s time to file a reply in the matter to which, the top court allowed his prayer. The Supreme Court was hearing the matter related to the alleged death of Dhanbad ASJ, Uttam Anand, who was allegedly mowed down by an autorickshaw while on a morning walk on July 28. The Supreme Court on July 30 took Suo Motu Cognisance (SMC) of the case after noting that it wanted to address the issue involving the safety and security of judicial officers across the country.
TOP COURT NOTED THAT STATES LIKE ANDHRA PRADESH, MAHARASHTRA, KERALA, TAMIL NADU, AND WEST BENGAL HAD SO FAR FAILED TO FILE AFFIDAVITS