Top
Begin typing your search above and press return to search.
News Updates

Digitized ID Cards For Advocates, Special Police Team For Security Audit, Production Of UTPs Via VC: Delhi High Court Suggestions For Court Security

Akshita Saxena
8 Nov 2021 8:45 AM GMT
Digitized ID Cards For Advocates, Special Police Team For Security Audit, Production Of UTPs Via VC: Delhi High Court Suggestions For Court Security
x

The Delhi High Court today circulated among all the stakeholders, a summary of suggestions prepared by it for enhancing security measures in all court premises situated in the national capital, following the shocking gun firing incident at Rohini District Court on September 24.This includes the suggestion made to the Delhi Government for making budgetary allocation to purchase...

Your free access to Live Law has expired
To read the article, get a premium account.
    Your Subscription Supports Independent Journalism
Subscription starts from
599+GST
(For 6 Months)
Premium account gives you:
  • Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.
  • Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.
Already a subscriber?

The Delhi High Court today circulated among all the stakeholders, a summary of suggestions prepared by it for enhancing security measures in all court premises situated in the national capital, following the shocking gun firing incident at Rohini District Court on September 24.

This includes the suggestion made to the Delhi Government for making budgetary allocation to purchase security equipment for the Courts.

The Bench of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh read out in open Court, the following suggestions:

  • Commissioner of Delhi Police should constitute a Team to (periodically) undertake security audit of all Courts in the national capital;
  • Peculiarity of each court complex shall be considered by this Team for deciding the number of police personnel to be deployed, number of cameras to be installed, etc.;
  • These police personnel shall be responsible for checking/ frisking;
  • Mechanism of frisking should be quick and efficient;
  • Frisking personnel should be deployed at main gate as well as outside every courtroom;
  • No baggage to be permitted inside court premises without proper scanning;
  • Round the clock monitoring of court building through CCTV cameras;
  • High security cases be heard via video conferencing;
  • Under Trial Prisoners appearance may be procured through virtual mode as far as possible;
  • Wherever they are required to be produced physically, proceedings may be conducted at vulnerable witness room/ inside jail;
  • Installation of automated gates like metro stations may be considered to handle huge number of visitors;
  • Issue entry stickers for vehicles;
  • Delhi Bar Council may issue digitized ID cards (with QR codes) for Advocates entry to court;
  • Delhi Police shall be responsible for regular and continuous security audits at all courts;
  • State government shall be accountable for making budgetary allocation to purchase security tools and equipment.

The Bench has however made it clear that these are only suggestions, subject to approval by stakeholders. "This is not an order. No directions," it said.

The copy of court's suggestions will be circulated among all stakeholders and the matter is now adjourned to November 24, for their response.

"This is a grave matter and requires immediate attention," the Chief Justice had earlier observed while asking the stakeholders to come up with suggestions, so as to address the issue of security lapse in courts, especially the District Courts.

Accordingly, the Delhi Police, the Bar Council of Delhi and the Delhi High Court Bar Association had filed their replies in the matter. Their suggestions may be read here.

The Delhi Police has also conducted security audits at all the seven courts in the city and has taken certain crucial and substantive steps to improve security measures. Read more here.

Case Title: Court on its own motion v. Commissioner of Police & Ors.

Next Story
Share it