Eye on recent court shootings, Supreme Court issues guidelines to protect stakeholders

The Supreme Court has said preserving the sanctity of a court as a space where justice is administered and rule of law upheld is non-negotiable as it termed the incidents of firings in court premises, as appalling and deeply concerning.

A bench of Justices S Ravindra Bhat and Justice Dipankar Datta said it is critical that judicial institutions take comprehensive steps to safeguard the well-being of all stakeholders.

The court issued guidelines to ensure safety and security in courts and digitisation of courtrooms across the country.

It said incidents of firings in court premises posed significant risks to the safety of not only judges but lawyers, court staff, litigants and the general public.

"Would not hope for the litigants who visit the temples of justice dwindle, if the very halls of justice lack the shield of security? How can the litigants secure justice for them when those entrusted to render justice are themselves insecure? These are questions which disturb us to no end, considering certain recent happenings involving firing of gun shots within the precincts of courts in India".

Supreme Court bench

The bench referred to three "appalling" incidents of firings in court complexes in the national capital in the past year and death of an Additional District Judge in Dhanbad on July 28, 2021 during morning walk after being hit by an auto rickshaw in suspicious circumstances.

"Countless incidents of lapses in court security have occurred where the safety of witnesses and court records have been jeopardised. It is, therefore, essential that security protocols and measures be implemented and strictly enforced to prevent such incidents from occurring in the first place," the bench said.

The court passed its order on a batch of petitions raising the issues of installation of CCTV cameras and other measures to ensure security within court premises.

Terming the issues as "indeed serious having far reaching consequences", the bench took into considerations various suggestions received from counsel for the parties, High Courts and amicus curiae senior advocate Sidharth Luthra.

The bench laid down guidelines, saying there is a need to establish a consistent dialogue with the respective state governments in order to ensure timely disbursement of funds and other assistance; these are underlying systemic concerns, and if left unaddressed, will stall the implementation of security measures.

Further, several security measures such as the issuance of court identity cards, installation of CCTV cameras and baggage scanners, regulation of footfall in court complexes, deployment of security personnel/relevant officers, and introducing other emergency measures were also suggested, the court noted.

"Various High Courts and other court complexes have already in place several measures including installation of CCTV cameras at all tiers. We, therefore, make it clear that these recommendations are only meant for those courts which are yet to put in place adequate measures for tackling any untoward incident," the bench said.

Supreme Court's proposed security measures

Among the security measures, the court said there ought to be a security plan in place, in line with the recommendations, to be prepared by the High Courts in consultation with the Principal Secretaries, Home Departments of each State Government and the Director Generals of Police of the States/Union Territories or the Commissioners of Police wherever a court complex is within the jurisdiction of a Police Commissionerate, as the case may be, which should be timely implemented at the state and district levels covering District Headquarters and other courts in outlying areas as well.

The court said the security plan may include proposal for setting up of permanent Court Security Unit(s) in each complex, indicating the strength and source of drawing of manpower, installation of CCTV cameras, securing entry and exit points with the help of adequate security equipments.

"The courts may consider putting in place security measures such as deployment of adequate police personnel, security stickers for vehicles, frisking, metal detectors, baggage scanners, court-specific entry passes, and biometric devices to enhance overall security. Other security measures may include regulating the use of court premises as thoroughfares, if necessary, even by way of total prohibition," the bench added.

The bench also asked the relevant authorities to keep a strict check on the relevant permissions for shops and vendors in court premises.

"It may be ensured that emergency measures like ambulances, medical facilities and firefighting services are immediately available and modernised within court complexes and unimpeded access of such vehicles to the premises is assured at all times. This includes ensuring unhindered movement and keeping the court complex vicinity free from traffic and parking congestion."

Supreme Court bench

The court directed that the copy of its order should be placed before the respective Chief Justices and the High Courts should ensure that periodic monthly reports are placed before the Chief Justice regarding availability of the measures and their updated status for timely corrective intervention.

The court sought an action taken report on the measures by October 10 as it put the matter for consideration on October 12, 2023.

On the issue of digitisation of judicial infrastructure, the bench said there are many courts which lack facilities to live stream court proceedings as well as facilities to record trials, so these issues should be looked into in the right earnest by the High Courts.

"With a futuristic vision, we need to progress with implementing fresh and innovative ideas so that the possibility of any untoward incident in any court premises is avoided. Initiatives like Audiovisual (AV) technology/Videoconferencing (VC) facility for recording of evidence and testimonies in trial, live-streaming of court proceedings at all levels, establishing e-SEWA Kendras, particularly in remote areas may also be considered accordingly," the bench said.