In an apparent reference to self-styled spiritual leader Asaram Bapu who has been arrested for allegedly molesting a teenaged girl, the Supreme Court on Tuesday said there was no need to provide him excessive security cover while in custody.
“I am surprised by hordes of security persons around one accused. Everybody says these are aberrations but it has become a rule... For last four-five days, the electronic media is showing that hordes of security personnel are guarding one accused. There is no need for this kind of security,” said a bench comprising Justices G.S. Singhvi and V. Gopala Gowda.
“There have been instances where drug peddlers enter either in religious fray or in political fray and then he starts grabbing properties. Law journals are full of such cases. These persons are involved in heinous crimes,” it said, apparently referring to Asaram. The bench made the observations while hearing a petition relating to the misuse of red beacons and VIP security by persons with enormous power and money.
The bench also remarked that while armed guards were being provided to the accused, there are not adequate numbers of security personnel to ensure safety of common persons.
During an earlier hearing too the bench had remarked that instead of providing heavy security cover to VIPs, it should rather be deployed for better purposes such as ensuring safety of women.
“Security persons are not meant for opening the (vehicle’s) gate. If a person is given a security person, then five persons would be needed if you consider the duty roster...,” the bench said, adding the “private persons can hire private agencies” which are in plenty.
During the hearing, the bench reacted sharply to a submission of senior advocate Harish Salve that an additional district and sessions judge, now presiding over a special anti-corruption court at Tis Hazari district courts complex here, has written to senior Punjab police officers demanding security cover, along with a pilot car, during his visit to the state.
“We are going to refer it to the chief justice of the Delhi high court,” the court said, and asked the counsel for Punjab not to provide the demanded security cover to the trial court judge “under any circumstances”.