New Delhi, Apr 21 (PTI) The Delhi High Court on Tuesday questioned authorities why judicial officers in the national capital were not being provided personal security officers (PSOs) when other states have made such arrangements for judges.
Pulling up the Delhi Police, Justice Manoj Jain, who was hearing a petition by Judicial Service Association of Delhi, said having a PSO was a “legitimate demand” and refusing to provide it compromised the independence of the judiciary.
Taking exception to the police’s stand that security was being provided in cases of threat perception, the court remarked if they were doing any charity.
“Tell me, are you doing any charity by providing security when there is a threat perception? Aisa lag raha hai aapke minutes (of the meeting) se. Jab threat hai tab hum de denge. As if you are doing some charity. Anybody in the system who is into criminal matter is entitled. Your only difficulty is burden on exchequer,” the court told the Delhi Police lawyer.
“You first want a person to be assaulted and you do not want to create an atmosphere where officers can freely roam,” the court further said.
Last month, the court had said that the severity of the petitioner’s demand for PSOs and requisite security arrangements at their respective homes could not be “undermined” and directed a meeting among senior officers of the Delhi government, Union Home Ministry and Delhi Police on the issue.
Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner on Tuesday said several states like Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh, Punjab and Gujarat were providing PSOs to their judicial officers, and security was required not only in their judicial residential complex but also outside.
The court orally stated that the concerned government should make some budgetary allocation for providing PSOs to over 700 judicial officers in the capital.
“If they (other states) can make arrangements for their judicial officers, what stops a city like Delhi where the crime is alarmingly high? Why such apathy? Then you say hume bureaucrats ko bhi dena padega, what is this answer? You’re compromising with the independence of the judiciary,” the court told lawyers appearing for the authorities.
The court listed the matter for hearing in May. PTI ADS KVK KVK
This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.