Jharkhand Judge Murder: Two Arrested Including Driver Of The Autorickshaw That Knocked Him Down

On Thursday (29 July), the Jharkhand police arrested two persons, including the driver of the autorickshaw that “deliberately” knocked down fatally Uttam Anand, additional sessions judge, Dhanbad, on Wednesday morning.

Anand was jogging on an empty road, about 500 m from his official residence, when he was knocked down by the autorickshaw. He was taken to hospital by a passer-by but he was declared brought dead. After the post-mortem, his mortal remains were sent to his home in Hazaribagh district for last rites.

While, initially, it was thought to be a hit-and-run case, after the emergence of closed circuit television (CCTV) footage, it became clear that the hit was deliberate. The clip has gone viral on social media. It shows the judge jogging along the extreme left side of the road and the autorickshaw suddenly turning towards him and hitting him.

The footage proved significant in the Supreme Court which quickly swung into action.

Thursday morning, as soon as the Supreme Court started, Supreme Court Bar Association president, senior advocate Vikas Singh, made an urgent oral mention on the case, calling it a “shocking and brazen attack on the independence of the judiciary”, before a bench of Justices D Y Chandrachud and M R Shah. He also said that the video footage was evidence and should be taken on record.

Singh told the court that the video showed that the vehicle suddenly moved off the road and slammed into the judge from behind who was jogging on a lonely stretch. He was found bleeding on the road and taken to the hospital, where he was left unidentified for hours.

When Anand didn't return home, his family gave a missing person’s complaint and the police finally traced the body. Initially, the family members as well as the police thought the cause of the death to be a hit-and-run accident. However, now, they have filed a complaint of murder.

“Our judicial officers should be protected. If judiciary has to be independent, we have to come in very sternly,” Singh was quoted as saying by The Hindu. Justice Chandrachud asked him to make a mention after sending an email to Chief Justice of India (CJI) N V Ramana and the Registrar in charge of mentioning process in the court.

“I had then mentioned it before the CJI, who said he has already talked to the Jharkhand Chief Justice. I was informed that the issue was taken up by the High Court on the judicial side. I am demanding a CBI inquiry into the incident,” Singh said.

CJI Ramana reportedly informed Singh that he had discussed the issue with the Jharkhand Chief Justice. The Jharkhand High Court, in turn, took suo motu cognisance of the matter of the video-clip and initiated an investigation.

SIT Probe Launched

The police constituted a special investigation team (SIT) under Dhanbad Superintendent of Police (City) R Ramkumar to probe the case. The progress of the probe would be submitted in the High Court.

The Hindu quoted police sources as saying that the autorickshaw was stolen around 2 am and the judge was allegedly murdered at 5 am. After the arrest of the tempo driver, the attention is now on a suspicious bike borne man seen in the CCTV footage.

“The incident is condemnable. The government is very sensitive to the issue. What appears from the footage is that it was a case of murder. The culprit will not be spared,” said Jharkhand Advocate General Rajiv Ranjan.

District Judiciary Challenges

The alleged murder of Uttam Anand, additional sessions judge, comes within a week of a 22 July judgment authored by Justice Chandrachud that recognised the “appalling work conditions” of the district judiciary.

The observations concerned a trial judge in Madhya Pradesh who had revealed that he was facing threats in a murder case in which the husband of a Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) MLA was the prime accused.

The judgement noted the challenges faced by the judges. One, they are targeted simply for standing up for what is right; two, a subservience to the administration of the High Court for transfers and postings which renders them vulnerable; and three, the larger malaise of the application of political pressure on trial judges.

The judgement stated that the independence of the judiciary was the independence of each and every judge. It said:

“Judicial independence of the district judiciary is cardinal to the integrity of the entire system. The courts comprised in the district judiciary are the first point of interface with citizens. If the faith of the citizen in the administration of justice has to be preserved, it is to the district judiciary that attention must be focused as well as the ‘higher’ judiciary.”