New Delhi: The Center has told the Supreme Court that it is the responsibility of the state government to provide security for judges and trial sites because the police and public order are the subject of the country and it can only issue some guidelines that have been done.
“Public orders and police are covered in List II from the Seventh Schedule of the Indian Constitution and, therefore, security to the court and the judges are in the country / UTS in question.
However, to strengthen security settings in this case, the guidelines have been issued by MHA …
For the Security of the High Court and District Court / Subordinate.
The guidelines, Inter-Alia, prescribed that the Protection Review Group (PRG), which consisted of the SPEM Country Branch, Intelligence and the Department of the House will conduct a regular review of security settings for the High Court and District Court / Subordinate and.
Judge, “the center said.
When the APEX court was checking the steps to improve the security of the judge after Suo Motu’s confession was needed for the murder of the trial court judge from Jharkhand recently and asked for responses from the country and the center, the government said that he published the re-guideline in 2007 as per unit / Which special branches must be made by the state and UTS to maintain the security of the judge / court.
The court was also to decide whether special strength at the line of train protection troops was regulated under the control of the judiciary for the protection of the judge and the court place on the pill submitted by Mahalik Karaunakar through Advocate Dutt Dutt.
“Guidelines issued by MHA Mandate that the Protection Review Group (PRG) will review security settings for HCS and district / lower courts and judges.
Registrar General HCS each will also be invited to the PRG meeting when such settings are being discussed.
Prg will be discussed Approved security measures.
PRG will conduct a security review after every 6 months, “said the government in his final statement.
The center, in a written statement, told the court that here there was no need to create special security force for justice and argued that special units or branches must be formed in the National Police for this purpose.
‘Security for judges and state courts’ responsibility’
