Maha Moves Sc Over Hc Order To Set Up Panel For Mumbai Attack

Maharashtra Govt on Friday challenged in the Supreme Court an order of the Bombay High Court constituting an interim committee headed by retired apex court judge B N Srikrishna to recommend steps for preventing terror strikes like the 26th November Mumbai massacre. A bench headed by Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan sought a response from a lawyers' body and some Mumbai residents on whose petition the High Court had set up the committee on 19th December. The state government has contended that the High Court has erred in constituting a Citizen Coordination Committee as most of its suggested members were already part of the State Security Council set up on 2nd December last. Maharashtra government said the working of the committee clearly interferes with the executive function of the state which is contrary to the doctrine of separation of power. The petition filed by the state government said that various measures were immediately taken and the situation arising out of the November terror attack has been widely discussed in the Assembly. The committee set up by High Court comprise state's Director General of Police, Chief Secretary, State Finance and Home Secretaries and eminent citizens from different walks of life in Mumbai. The High Court which had passed the interim order while hearing six PILs on the terror attacks, had said the committee will in no way interfere with the probe into the attacks or the government's decision-making process. The PILs were filed by Society of Indian Law Firms (SILF) and a few individuals. SILF sought creation of a citizen's council and other PILs demanded a commission of inquiry into attacks among other things. The PIL filed by Vijay Mukhi, an information technology expert, sought implementation of e-surveillance measures. The High Court had made Mukhi a member of the committee. Other petitioners too were asked to give their suggestions to the panel. The High Court on 19th December expressed displeasure that the State Security Council set up by the government on 2nd December has not yet met even once. It had asked the committee to submit its report before the next hearing scheduled after six weeks. The High Court also said only one person should be authorised to give information about ongoing investigation of terror attacks to avoid conflicting stories appearing in the media. It was not satisfied by the affidavits filed by the State and Union Governments. "Affidavits are unsatisfactory," it had said, asking for detailed affidavits. About contradictory statements made by police officers and politicians regarding the November 26 attacks, number of terrorists who landed in the city, number of terrorists who allegedly escaped, and various theories about death of ATS chief Hemant Karkare, the court said "all this erodes public faith in the state administration". "This requires attention of the highest authorities... only one person should give information to media." The court was not happy with the constitution of State Security Council. "It has both Chief Minister and Leader of Opposition...It will never meet," Chief Justice Swatantra Kumar, had observed. Pointing out that the council was yet to be formed completely (public representatives are yet to be selected), and it had never met since the notification on 2nd December, the court said the state has not showed enough urgency in this regard.

"Loved reading this piece by Prakash Yedhula?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"

Join our Telegram group

Join our Whatsapp group