Two people were detained on Thursday, in connection with the Dhanbad ‘hit-and-run’ case that murdered judge Uttam Anand as he was out on a morning walk.
Senior superintendent of police (SSP), Dhanbad, Sanjiv Kumar, told media that the arrests were made after the three-wheeler involved in the incident was recovered.
According to CCTV evidence, the Dhanbad court’s district and sessions judge-8, Anand was jogging on one side of a reasonably broad road at Randhir Verma Chowk early on Wednesday, when a heavy auto-rickshaw drove towards him, struck him from behind and left the scene. This aroused suspicions that it wasn’t a hit-and-run accident and the vehicle intentionally slammed into him. Locals took him to a nearby hospital, where the doctors declared him dead on arrival.
As per court sources in Dhanbad, Anand, who is renowned for being a stern judge, recently rejected the bail requests of a number of gangsters. It is too early to relate this decision to the hit-and-run case, police said.
‘We have arrested two persons, auto driver Lakhan Verma and his helper Rahul Verma, on Thursday morning. Rahul Verma, a resident of Digwadih, Dhanbad, was arrested from a tempo stand, while the other person was held in Giridih,’ the SSP said.
He further stated that the three-wheeler found in Giridih is registered in the name of a lady. The auto-rickshaw was stolen at around 2 am on Wednesday and at about 5 am the judge was hit.
A special investigation team (SIT) led by Dhanbad SP R. Ramkumar, has been constituted to investigate the case.
The Supreme Court took suo motu notice of the judge’s death on Friday. According to LiveLaw, a bench led by CJI Ramana ordered the Jharkhand state secretary and director general of police to provide a report on the progress of the judge’s death investigation within a week.
‘In Re Safeguarding Courts and Protecting Judges’ (Death of Additional Sessions Judge, Dhanbad) is the title of the suo moto case.
Also Read: Judge dies after autorickshaw ‘intentionally’ hits him during walk
The report said that the top court made it clear that it is aware the Jharkhand High Court is ‘seized of the issue,’ and this suo motu cognisance will not interfere with the court’s operations.
The bench, according to LiveLaw, is worried about the ‘bigger problem’ of the nature of the occurrence and the state government’s efforts to protect judicial officials both inside and outside the courtroom.
Similar occurrences are occurring across the country, according to the bench, and the problem ‘needs a broader consideration for a comprehensive assessment’ of judicial officer safety and the interests of the legal profession.
Post Your Comments