Judges are vulnerable to attacks: Court

New Delhi: Expressing concern over the safety of judicial officers who are mostly without any security cover, a city court on Tuesday said that judges were  “vulnerable” to murderous assaults for their verdicts, which always go against one of the parties in a case. While awarding a 10-year jail term to three convicts for assaulting three trial court judges in a road rage case here in 2012, additional sessions judge R. K. Tripathi said that the incident has “shaken the conscience” of the society and sends a message that “nobody is safe”.

The attackers had forced the judges to come out of an official car and severely assaulted them. While sending Anil Raj, Prashant and Rohit to jail for ten years and imposing fines, the court asserted that stringent punishment was a must and the “unscrupulous” convicts cannot be forgiven in any manner as their act was “deliberate” and “intentional”.

The court noted that the aggrieved party may have a grudge against a judge and may target him whenever they find a chance.

“Nowadays, safety and security of judges and other public servants is a matter of grave concern and importance. The public is expected to behave respectfully with such public servants, rather than act violently to settle personal scores. It is a matter of grave concern that despite seeing the sticker of judges on the car and knowing fully well that they are judges, they did not show any sign of respect or restraint, rather became more violent and aggressive,” it said.

The court said the convicts had not only shown disrespect towards public servants but also took law in their own hands. “The convicts have shown utmost disrespect to the public servants. They took the law in their own hands and tried to prove themselves that they are above the law. They not only damaged the government vehicle but also caused injuries to the victims,” the judge said.

The court held the convicts, all Delhi residents, guilty of the offences including attempt to murder and assault on a public servant to deter him from discharge of duty under the IPC and relevant provisions of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act.