Dhanbad Judge Death Case: Supreme Court Grants Last Chance to Remaining States to File Reply in 10 Days

New Delhi, August 17: 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 today that Assam has given the details of security arrangements. Jharkhand and Gujarat filed their reply on Monday, after complying with the Supreme Court's order regarding the safety and security of various arrangements for Judges and court complexes in their respective states. CBI Takes Accused in Judge Death Case to Delhi for Narco Test: Police.

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 today 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 alleged brutal killing of Uttam Anand, the ASJ, from Dhanbad, Jharkhand, after noting that it wanted to address the main issue involving the safety and security of judicial officers across the country.

A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was also filed by the lawyer, Vishal Tiwari, seeking directions to the Centre and all the State governments to grant 'X' category security to all judicial officers in this case also. New Delhi Shocker: Man and Woman Set Themselves on Fire in Front of Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court also took note of the fact in one of its hearings that there is little being done so far to ensure the safety and security of judges of lower courts and High Courts, as they are allegedly being attacked with when they did not give any favorable order in favor of the accused persons.

(This is an unedited and auto-generated story from Syndicated News feed, LatestLY Staff may not have modified or edited the content body)