Skip to content
Legalonus

Legalonus

Acpuitas sequitur legam

  • Current Affairs
  • Legal Articles
  • Legal Maxim
  • Legal News
  • News
  • About us.
  • Call for Blogs
  • Official Legalonus WhatsApp Group “Legalonus Community” join now!
  • Editorial Board Page
  • Editorial Board Profile
  • Profile
  • Volume I Issue I (2022)
  • en English
    ar Arabicbn Bengalizh-CN Chinese (Simplified)cs Czechda Danishnl Dutchen Englishfr Frenchde Germangu Gujaratihi Hindiit Italianla Latinmr Marathine Nepalipt Portuguesepa Punjabiru Russiansd Sindhies Spanish
  • Toggle search form
  • UP Government renames Kakori Conspiracy as Kakori Train Action Current Affairs
  • EUTHANASIA: SHOULD IT BE LEGALISED IN INDIA? Articles
  • SECTION 403 AND 405 OF IPC Articles
  • Rajasthan HC: Live-in relationship between man, married woman illicit Legal News
  • Pacta sunt servenda Legal Maxim
  • Religious Freedom Under Indian Constitution Articles
  • Nipah Virus in Kerala: Central team visits house of 12-year old boy who died of Nipah in Kozhikode Current Affairs
  • What is an e- visa? Current Affairs

‘Can’t Ignore State’s Negligence, Should’ve Provided Security’: Supreme Court On Judge Uttam Anand’s Killing

Posted on August 7, 2021August 7, 2021 By Ayush No Comments on ‘Can’t Ignore State’s Negligence, Should’ve Provided Security’: Supreme Court On Judge Uttam Anand’s Killing

Supreme Court on Friday mentioned that the State’s neglect in the recent killing of judge Uttam Anand who was acting as Additional District and Sessions Judge at Dhanbad, cannot be overlooked.
A Division Bench including CJI NV Ramana and Justice Surya Kant mentioned that being fully informed that Dhanbad is a mafia range where many advocates have been killed and judges have been hit in the past, the State should have given some security to the Judicial officer at most limited around their colonies.
The comments came while the bench was regarding the suo motu case considered by it on the matter of security of judges and courts in the viewing of the killing of Additional District Judge Uttam Anand of Jharkhand last week. The Bench, accordingly, urged all States to acknowledge and file a status report with regard to what kind of protection they have offered to judicial officers.

Attorney General KK Venugopal whose assistance the Court asked in the present interest, submitted that,

JOIN US ON TELEGRAM

“Judges as a family are more vulnerable than bureaucrats. This is an open court where one person succeeds and other doesn’t. There has to be given adequate security. There has to be an organisation which determines the amount of vulnerability depending on the kind of cases.”
Spread the love
Legal News Tags:CJI NV Ramana and Justice Surya Kant

Post navigation

Previous Post: Can A State Prescribe Qualification For Admission To Medical Courses Higher Than Minimum Eligibility Rules Guided by MCI?: SC To Analyze
Next Post: It is up to the married couples to determine which religion to follow: Gujarat High Court on religious conversion law

Related Posts

  • Lack of quality debate in Parliament while formulating laws: CJI NV Ramana Legal News
  • UAPA offences have to be tried by special NIA court even if investigated by State Police: Bombay HC denies bail to Surendra Gadling in 2016 case Legal News
  • Lok Sabha passes Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Amendment) Bill, 2021- All you need to know Legal News
  • Parliament Passes Tribunals Reforms Bill With Same Provisions Struck Down By Supreme Court Legal News
  • People have very limited belief in the judicial system; will lose that too if courts dismiss everything on technicalities: Kerala High Court Legal News
  • I did intense research and wrote “The Voice of Dissent in the Last Court of Last Resort”: Justice Rohinton Nariman Current Affairs

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

July 2022
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
« Jun    
subscribeSubscribe to my channel
«
Prev
1
/
3
Next
»
loading
play
Honorable High Court of Karnataka verdict on HIJAB issue. #viral #shorts #judiciary #law #caselaws
play
Section 6 of Indian evidence act concept based question Res Gestae #shorts #viral #youtubeshorts
play
Difference between rule of relevancy and rule of admissibility. understand the difference in 1 min.
play
can a examination of witnesses be done through video conferencing? #viral #youtubeshorts
play
Last Seen Theory under Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Understand the concept in 27 seconds!
play
Concept of Successive Bail. #viral #caselaws #judiciary #law #pcsj #legalknowledge
«
Prev
1
/
3
Next
»
loading

  • Changes to DICGC Act: Deposit insurance cover gets stronger Current Affairs
  • TAXATION AND GENDER EQUALITY Articles
  • CASE ANALYSIS: ARNESH KUMAR V. STATE OF BIHAR (2014) 8 SCC 273 Articles
  • Law and order: Has significance! Articles
  • These are the 9 petitions which Supreme Court will hear today [Pegasus snoop gate] Legal News
  • Legalization of Prostitution Articles
  • Criminal Defamation Amidst #MeToo Articles
  • Healthcare as a Human Right Articles

Recent Posts

  • ANALYSIS OF MOTOR LAWS IN INDIA
  • SECULARISM IN INDIA – BINARY EFFECT WITH JUDICIARY & CONSTITUTION
  • SCHOOLS OF CRIMINOLOGY
  • CASE ANALYSIS: U. UNICHOYI AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF KERALA
  • RUSSIA-UKRAINE CONFLICT – WHAT IT SIGNIFIES FOR TAIWAN’S FUTURE

About us

  • About us.
  • Contact
  • Current Affairs
  • Editorial Board Page
  • Editorial Board Profile
  • Legal Articles
  • Legal Maxim
  • Legal News
  • News
  • Official Legalonus WhatsApp Group “Legalonus Community” join now!
  • Profile
  • Volume I Issue I (2022)

Choose Language

en English
ar Arabicbn Bengalizh-CN Chinese (Simplified)cs Czechda Danishnl Dutchen Englishfr Frenchde Germangu Gujaratihi Hindiit Italianla Latinmr Marathine Nepalipt Portuguesepa Punjabiru Russiansd Sindhies Spanish

Copyright © 2022 Legalonus.

Powered by PressBook News WordPress theme