The Bombay high court, on Thursday, sought to know the status and condition of all anti-terror equipment purchased by the state government after the November 2008 terror attack.
The government informed that court that it had spent Rs 126 crore within a year of the attack on improving security. The amount was spent towards buying, among other things, bullet-proof jackets, arms and ammunition, speed boats and armoured vehicles.
Following an earlier order by the high court based on a clutch of public interest litigations, the government, on Thursday, furnished an affidavit it had filed before the Supreme Court last year. The affidavit, filed in October 2010, details the steps taken after the November 2008 terror attack.
It stated that the purpose and objective behind appointing a committee by the high court had been fulfilled. The affidavit added that the government had taken several other steps, including the establishment of Force 1, Maharashtra State Security Corporation, State Security Council and State Security Commission, setting up an NSG hub and upgradation of the ATS.
A division bench of justice DD Sinha and justice RG Ketkar wanted to know when these forces were formed and where they were deployed currently.
“Are they [articles] being used and in good condition,” asked justice Sinha asked. “Are they adequate enough to take care of terrorist activities in the future,” the court wanted to know.
Advocate Anil Sakhare, appearing for one of the petitioners, contended that the government was yet to specify the action taken on the recommendations made by Ram Pradhan Committee.
The court held that the state government ought to be equipped with latest equipment to deal with any emergency. “Something should happen at the grassroot level. State should take care of security… to avoid future attacks,” the court said.
The court has now directed public prosecutor PA Pol, to file an affidavit and status report on all these points.
At the last hearing, the government notified the court that it had been directed by the Supreme Court to dispose of the public interest litigations pending before it.
However, the petitioners argued that some of the concerns raised by them in their petitions were yet to be covered by the state before the Supreme Court and hence, those points should be looked into by the high court. The case will come up for hearing after four weeks.