The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked the Centre to take steps to protect judges and ensure the safety of courts, reported NDTV.

The bench of Chief Justice NV Ramana and Justices Surya Kant and Aniruddha Bose was hearing a suo motu case in connection with the death of a judge in Jharkhand. The bench said that matter of judges’ safety should not be left to the states alone.

During the hearing, the Centre said it was not possible to have a dedicated security force for judges and courts, adding that states will be in a better position to deal with the matter.

Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, said the protection of judges and security of courts need day-to-day coordination with the police.

“From coordination point of view, deployment of local police is advisable,” he added. “There can be state specific issues. The state police is better equipped to deal with surveillance of criminals, intelligence regarding threat etc. It has to be state specific instead of country specific.”

To this, the court said: “You are the best person to get this done.”

When Mehta pointed out that there are already existing guidelines for the states regarding the protection of judges and courts, the bench asked if those were being followed.

“The guidelines are fine, parameters have been laid down etc,” said Justice Surya Kant, according to Live Law. “But the question is if they are being followed or not and to what extent protection has been provided to Judges, lawyers etc. You are the central government, you can call DCPs [deputy commissioners of police] of states and ask for reports.”

The Supreme Court also warned the states for not filing counter affidavits on the status of security measures for judges. It asked the states to submit a report within a week, failing which the court will impose a fine of Rs 1 lakh.

The bench said the chief secretaries must be present for the next hearing if states do not submit their reports in a week. The court will hear the matter after 10 days.

“States are painting a rosy picture on steps being taken,” the court said. “But despite that, [there are] repeated incidents of attacks on judicial officers.”

The court added that states often use lack of funds to install CCTVs as an alibi. “But those will only record the crime,” said the bench. “They cannot prevent a criminal from attacking and cannot prevent threats.”

Dhanbad judge’s death

Judge Uttam Anand was allegedly murdered in a hit-and-run incident on July 28 while he was on his morning jog in Dhanbad district of Jharkhand. CCTV footage of the incident showed an auto-rickshaw suddenly swerving towards the 49-year-old, who was walking on an empty road, and hitting him. The vehicle, which was reportedly stolen, then drove away.

Judge Anand had been hearing the murder case of Ranjay Singh, who was a close aide of former Bharatiya Janata Party MLA Sanjiv Singh. He had also rejected the bail applications of suspected shooters Abhinav Singh and Ravi Thakur. They have links to gangster Aman Singh, who is in jail for the killing of Dhanbad’s former Deputy Mayor Niraj Singh.

During a hearing on August 6, Chief Justice Ramana had observed that the investigating agencies in the country do not respond when judges complain about threats they receive.

“If an adverse order is passed, then judiciary is maligned,” Ramana had said. “If judges file a complaint to police or [the] CBI [Central Bureau of Investigation] they do not respond. [The] Intelligence Bureau and [the] CBI is not helping judiciary at all.”