Armstrong Murder Case: Madras HC Invites Suggestions To Beef Up Security Following Reports Of Bomb Exchange Happening On Court Premises

The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice M Jothiraman thus invited suggestions from the bar bodies for increasing the security in the court campus and providing sensitization to the advocates and the security personnel. The court made it clear that the lawyers should cooperate with security checking.

“We need to come up with some system. Both the lawyers and the police should be sensitized. The lawyers can come 5 minutes early so that there's time for checking. If you're coming to the court at the last moment, then you'll definitely be irritated with the checking. We should allow the officers to check if there's something unusual,” the court orally remarked.

Though the counsel for the bar bodies submitted that the transfer of country bomb was a mere allegation, the court said that every security checking is based on apprehensions and that one could not wait for something to happen to increase security.

“We're not saying that there should be an airport-level checking. But there should be some reasonable checking. Some discreet checking. You can't oppose that. All checking is based on some apprehensions only. It's not like airport checking is done because everyone who comes to airpost is carrying bomb. All that checking is based on some apprehensions only. So the guards must be allowed to check if they have any apprehension,” the court remarked orally.

Background

BSP leader Armstrong was murdered on July 5, 2024. The investigation later suggested that the murder was a retaliation to the killing of history-sheeter Arcot Suresh in August 2023. In addition to this, the police have also suspected multiple other motives behind the murder. In October 2024, the Greater Chennai police had filed chargesheet against 30 persons. Detention orders were also passed against some of the accused under the Tamil Nadu Goondas Act which has been challenged in the present batch of pleas.

In the previous hearings, while opposing quashing the detaining orders, the Additional Public Prosecutor had informed the court that the accused had allegedly exchanged country bombs inside the court campus. The AAG had also added that quashing the preventive detention may put the lives of the accused in danger, and may even lead to untoward incidents.

Shocked over the same, the bench had instructed the AAG to submit a status report on the investigation in connection with the exchange of bombs.

When the matter was taken up today, the court opined that some measures had to be taken to increase the security in the court campus to prevent such incidents. The court thus asked the counsels present to discuss with the respective bar bodies and come up with proposals.

Case Title: Porkodi v The Secretary to Government and Others

Case No: HCP 3134 of 2024