Security remains lax in the district court complexes despite a string of lapses over the years. The latest incident involving a man firing multiple shots at a woman over a monetary dispute ought to make the concerned authorities sit up and take necessary remedial measures, writes Ujwal Jalali
The events which unfolded in the Saket court complex on April 21 involving a debarred lawyer allegedly firing multiple gunshots at a woman who reportedly owed him money left many in the national capital with a sense of déja vu.
Almost exactly a year ago, on April 22, 2022, an incident of firing took place at the Rohini court complex following a scuffle between two advocates and one of their clients. According to the police, a constable of the Nagaland Armed Police (NAP) deployed at the court opened fire on the ground. The bullet had ricocheted off the floor, leaving two injured.
Prior to that, on September 24, 2021, two gunmen dressed as lawyers opened fire inside the same court complex. The two attackers, Rahul Tyagi and Jagdeep Jagga allegedly posed as lawyers to enter a courtroom and fired multiple bullets at gangster Jitender Maan alias Gogi. They were gunned down by police personnel present in the court.
This incident reportedly spooked jailed gangster Sandeep Jatheri alias Kala Jatheri to such an extent that he filed a plea in the court seeking directions to the concerned jail authorities to shackle and handcuff him whenever he was produced for hearing, fearing that he might be eliminated by a rival gang in similar fashion or get killed in a ‘fake encounter’ by the police.
The Rohini court shootout was not just an ordinary killing. It was a murder in broad daylight in front of dozens of witnesses. It led to considerable uproar and outrage as Gogi was reportedly being produced by the police before a judge in the court, and the two assailants managed to enter the courtroom donning lawyers’ attire, smuggling in weapons without being detected.
Then, just two months later, on December 9, 2021, the same court complex was literally shaken up when a low-intensity blast went off inside a courtroom, injuring one person present within the blast radius.
This led to an alert being sounded in the national capital out of fears of a terrorist attack having taken place, but it turned out to be a case of personal enmity. As per the Delhi Police, a DRDO scientist Bharat Bhushan Kataria (48), had planted an Improvised Explosive Device (IED) in the courtroom to target a rival, a lawyer named Amit Vashisht. He reportedly held the latter responsible for protracted legal battles leading to career problems and stress.
Security measures have remained inadequate
The concerned authorities were quick to react and issued strict directions to the Delhi Police to ensure proper security arrangements at the district court premises in the city. A year later, in December 2022, the police informed the Delhi High Court that in order to strengthen the security arrangements of all the seven district courts in the national capital, 997 security personnel, including those derived from the local police and the central armed police forces (CAPF), were deployed to secure them.
In a status report filed before the HC, the police said that more than 2,700 CCTVs, 85 baggage scanners, 242 hand-held metal detectors and 146 door-frame metal detectors were installed in the district courts.
In the past two years, a number of other restrictions have been introduced, such as allowing only authorized vehicles bearing stickers or ID cards to enter court complexes. These measures were intended to bolster security at court facilities and prevent further violent incidents from taking place. However, quite clearly, the situation has not improved to any discernible extent at the seven district courts in the city – Tis Hazari, Rohini, Saket, Dwarka, Karkardooma, Rouse Avenue and Patiala House Court.
Even in the latest incident which took place on April 21, the accused reportedly managed to have the weapon smuggled into the Saket court complex through a person hired by him as a PSO, who pretended to be his munshi (legal assistant).
Similar incidents happened in Hindi heartland
Such incidents remind a section of the people about shootouts in court complexes in Uttar Pradesh, some of which seemed to have been following dramatic film scripts. In February 2009, in a broad daylight shooting, two undertrials were killed by three unidentified armed men in the Hathras district court premises, sparking a gun battle with the police which shot dead the trio.
In December 2019, a man accused of a double murder was shot dead inside a courtroom in western Uttar Pradesh’s Bijnor even as court proceedings were on. Even as the prisoner, Shanawaz Ansari, was being produced in front of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, three men whipped out pistols and shot him. As per reports, such was the intensity of the firing inside the courtroom that even the judge and other court staff had to duck for cover. In October 2021, a lawyer was shot dead inside the Shahjahanpur district court complex with a country-made revolver while he was in the court to meet a clerk.
Suggestions by lawyers to ‘beef up security’
North Delhi Lawyers Association general secretary Vineet Jindal says that the security arrangements in the city’s district courts are in a pathetic condition.“Look at how criminals or random people wearing lawyers’ uniforms manage to enter the court premises without being detected at the gates. Even the common man or a litigant who enters the premises just has to produce an identity card to gain entrance, except that such IDs are never verified,” he said.
He suggested replication of the pass system which is in place in the higher courts to deal with the situation. “These can be electronically generated and verified by the security staff so that only legitimate litigants and visitors can gain admission to the court complexes,” he said.
Asked about the issue of the lawyers’ fraternity not cooperating with security personnel at the gates, Jindal said they should then be reported to the higher authorities and even the Bar Council for necessary action. He said that the Bar Council of Delhi has issued a notification for issuing fresh ID cards for its members. “They cannot be copied and misused in any manner,” he added.
Manjeet Mathur, secretary of Rohini Bar Association, felt that the issue of maintaining and strengthening security at the city courts should be taken to its logical conclusion.“Every time we have seen that once an incident happens, there will be a discussion on the security situation and after a few days everyone forgets about it,” he said. He said it was important for police officials to have regular interaction with members of the Bar which didn’t happen. He contended that the metal detectors at some courts were dysfunctional, which meant that weapons could be smuggled in.
Delhi Bar Association president and member of the Bar Council of Delhi, Nitin Ahlawat, on his part, demanded the enactment of an Advocates Protection Act to give them a safe working environment. He said that the courts had a huge footfall of litigants, the general public and lawyers and this left them vulnerable. This move, he said, would protect the lawyers and other visitors in the court from physical attacks. “As of now it has been only enacted in Rajasthan,” he pointed out.
Supreme Court emphasises on ‘balanced approach’
Recently, the Supreme Court, while hearing a clutch of petitions demanding increase in security across court complexes in the country and a specialized force to safeguard judges, lawyers, litigants and witnesses, observed that courts are public spaces, and they cannot be converted into ‘fortresses’ which prevent people from accessing them.
“Courts are ultimately public spaces. We can’t turn courts into fortresses. Look at this court. It’s one thing to say that the court is an open court since we provide access through video-conferencing. But if someone wants to come to watch proceedings, it’s nearly impossible for a common man to enter,” a two-member Apex Court bench said. The bench emphasised that there has to be a ‘balanced approach’ that looks at security and access depending on the need since ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach cannot work in
the matter.
Bullets flying around in courts
September 24, 2021: Two gunmen dressed as lawyers opened fire inside Rohini court complex. They allegedly posed as lawyers to enter a courtroom and fired multiple bullets at gangster Jitender Maan alias Gogi. They were later gunned down by police personnel present in the court.
December 9, 2021: A low-intensity blast went off inside a courtroom at Rohini court complex, injuring one person present within the blast radius. As per the Police, a DRDO scientist had planted an Improvised Explosive Device (IED) in the courtroom to target a rival whom he reportedly held responsible for protracted legal battles leading to career problems and stress.
April 22, 2022: An incident of firing took place at the Rohini court complex following a scuffle between two advocates and one of their clients. According to the police, a constable of the Nagaland Armed Police (NAP) opened fire on the ground. The bullet ricocheted off the floor, leaving two injured.
April 21, 2023: A woman was injured in a firing that took place in Saket court over a monetary dispute. As per the police, a man dressed as a lawyer fired multiple rounds at the woman. It said the assailant was a former advocate who had filed a case of cheating against the woman over a dispute involving Rs 25 lakh and the hearing in the case was scheduled for Friday