The Allahabad High Court on Tuesday asked the Uttar Pradesh Government as to how long would it take to provide the arrangements with regard to security, biometric, and CCTV cameras in respect of all the Judgeships in the State of Uttar Pradesh.
Essentially, the query was raised by the Bench of Justice Suneet Kumar and Justice Samit Gopal in a suo moto PIL titled In Re Suo Moto Relating To Security And Protection In All Court Campuses In The State Of U.P., initiated after the incident of open firing in Bijnor district court.
The Court has granted one week time to enable the counsel appearing for the State to categorically state, as to when the biometrics in the Azamgarh and Lucknow Judgeship shall be executed and made functional.
With this, the matter has been listed for further hearing on December 2, 2021.
On the previous hearing in the matter, noting the deficiency of security personnel posted in different Judgeships, the Court had asked the State to file a reply to the actual sanctioned and deployed security personnel in each judgeship.
However, on November 23, the Court perused the affidavit of the UP Government in that regard, however, the Court was not satisfied with the averments made therein as it noted that the work on the ground is not yet progressing.
Significantly, in its September 2021 order, the Court had noted that the State Government had made no progress with regard to Gate Automation, Bio-Metric system and Gate Passes for the lawyers/litigants in lower courts of the State, on account of pending financial sanction/approval since 20 February 2020.
It may be noted that last year in March, the Allahabad High Court had directed all the lower courts to allow the appearance of Advocates only upon the furnishing of their enrollment number.
Vide orders dated December 20, 2019 and January 2, 2020, the high court had passed a slew of directions to ensure adequate security in court premises.
Subsequently, vide order dated January 17 2020, the high court took on record a Compliance affidavit, filed by Additional Chief Secretary to the State, viz. installation of CCTV cameras, the appointment of designated Quick Response Teams, restricted entry of vehicles in court premises, construction of boundary walls, etc.
Case Title- In Re Suo Moto Relating To Security And Protection In All Court Campuses In The State Of UP