Madhya Pradesh High Court (file photo) – Photo: Amar Ujala Expansion Taking cognizance of the incident of indecency with a judicial officer of Mandsaur district of Madhya Pradesh, hearing is going on in the form of public interest litigation regarding the security of courts, judicial officers and personnel and premises. Objection was expressed on the status report presented by the government regarding the security arrangements. High Court Chief Justice Ravi Vijay Kumar Malimath and Justice Vishal Mishra have issued instructions to present the reply along with the affidavit regarding the objection. The next hearing on the petition has been scheduled on 40 February.

It is significant that 23 On July 2016 with judicial officer Rajvardhan Gupta by indecently assaulting him on the national highway of Mandsaur. The jhumjhatki was done. On which the then Registrar General of the High Court, Manohar Mamtani first conducted a preliminary inquiry. After a preliminary inquiry, relevant newspaper reports, video clippings and other evidence corroborated the attacks on Gupta, the Registrar General placed the entire matter before the then Acting Chief Justice Rajendra Menon. Expressing concern over the occurrence of such incidents even after the orders given earlier, the High Court had directed to hear the case in the form of a public interest litigation. While hearing the petition, the High Court asked the government to set up boundary walls and police posts of sufficient height in the court premises of the state. Instructions were given to present the status report regarding the security of the judicial officers and their families in the residential premises and the security arrangements in the court. In the status report presented by the government, it has been said that there is sufficient height in the 414 district court of the state. has boundary wall, whereas in three district courts the height of boundary wall is not sufficient and in four district courts there is no boundary ball. Apart from this, there are permanent police posts in 6 district courts and temporary police posts in 6 district courts. Sent a proposal to sanction Rs. crore for the security of the judicial officers and their families in the residential premises. Has gone. During the hearing of the petition, the advocate appointed by the High Court told the Jugal Peeth that only 05 District Court has boundary wall of sufficient height. Apart from this, other objections were also presented in the status report presented by the government. After hearing the petition, the couple’s bench issued the above orders. During the hearing of the petition, advocate Amit Seth presented his side on behalf of the government. ,