E-Paper
SC asks Jharkhand HC to track CBI probe into judge’s death
The Supreme Court on Monday noted that the investigating agency has not made any progress on the reason or motive behind the hit-and-run incident that claimed Anand’s life.
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) is yet to ascertain if there was any foul play in the death of additional district and sessions judge Uttam Anand, who was fatally knocked down by a vehicle on July 28 in Jharkhand’s Dhanbad.
The Supreme Court on Monday noted that the investigating agency has not made any progress on the reason or motive behind the hit-and-run incident that claimed Anand’s life.
“There is nothing in your sealed cover. We want something concrete. Arrest and seizing of vehicles were done by the state. You (CBI) have not indicated anything about intention or motive or any reason,” a bench, headed by Chief Justice of India NV Ramana told solicitor general Tushar Mehta.
Mehta was representing the CBI in the public interest litigation registered by the court on its own over the death of the judicial officer in suspicious circumstances. The S-G replied that the interrogation of the two arrested persons was on and that any disclosure about the ongoing investigation may impact the probe.
At this, the bench, which also included justices Vineet Saran and Surya Kant, said that the agency should submit weekly status reports before the Jharkhand high court that will henceforth monitor the CBI’s investigation.
“We will keep the matter pending here and we will request the chief justice of the high court to examine your reports. Let the high court monitor your progress on a weekly basis,” it told the S-G.
The court then recorded in its order: “Taking into account the gravity of the matter, we deem it appropriate to direct the CBI to file a report before the high court of Jharkhand every week and we further request the chief justice of the high court to monitor the investigation.”
Apart from the specific instance of Dhanbad’s judge, the top court underlined that registration of the suo motu (on its own motion) case intends to resolve the alarming situation in the country where judicial officers and lawyers are being pressurised and intimidated by threats of violence or actual violence.
“There is, therefore, an institutional need to create an environment where judicial officers feel safe and secure,” said the bench in its order as it tagged the suo motu case with a public interest litigation of 2019 which pertained to the security of judicial officers.
Advocate Karunakar Mahalik had filed the PIL seeking a specialised force for security to all courts, judges, lawyers, litigants and witnesses in the country. In December 2019, the court had issued notices to the Union government and all the states. On Monday, the bench asked the Centre and states to put in their replies as soon as possible.
Judges’ security had drawn the bench’s concerns on Friday last week too when it lamented that Intelligence Bureau (IB) and CBI “are not helping the judiciary at all. CJI Ramana rued that judges are not on priority for the investigating agencies and that their complaints are not heeded despite specialised body like the CBI getting roped in.
“In one or two places, the court ordered a CBI inquiry. I am very sorry to say that the CBI has done nothing in more than one year. At one place, I know, the CBI has done nothing. I think we have expected some changes in CBI’s attitude. But there is no change in the attitude of the CBI. I am sorry to observe this but this is the situation,” the CJI had told attorney general KK Venugopal, who was called by the bench for assistance.
On July 30, the bench had emphasised that it is the State’s obligation to protect judges to ensure they can discharge their duties fearlessly as it took suo motu cognisance of Anand’s death. A day later, the Jharkhand government recommended the CBI probe into the case.
