New Delhi:
Coming down heavily on states that have not responded to the Centre's letter to slash VIP security so cops can focus on the common man, an upset Supreme Court today said: "Bring your iPads to court and make the VIP security order clear".
The top court also issued a veiled threat to the errant states: comply by August 5 or officials will face the consequences.
The top court was unhappy with states like Punjab, who cited "communication gap" for not replying to the union home secretary's letter sent two months ago, asking states to prune VIP security.
"We don't accept this communication gap. We are in the 21st century," the court said, "bring the iPad inside court and communicate our order right from here."
As many as 10 states, including Gujarat, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and Jammu and Kashmir have failed to respond to the letter, sent after the court asked for a consolidated plan on VIP security.
The court said, "If officers of state governments flout the Union Home Secretary's directions it has very serious repercussions. We have so far avoided summoning senior officers of the government. It appears that our orders have been misunderstood."
In response to petitions, the Supreme Court has repeatedly questioned lavish security for a chosen few at the cost of the public at large.
In February, the court said women felt unsafe in cities like Delhi where the December gangrape of a 23-year-old led to nationwide shock and anger and triggered moves for stronger laws on crime against women.
In India, there are only 137 policemen for every lakh of the population and some Rs. 341 crore was spent on guarding VVIPs in Delhi last year. Most of this money was spent on 376 individuals given Z-plus or central security forces. Rs. 40 crore was spent on the security in Rashtrapati Bhawan alone.
The judges had said, "We can understand security being provided to the President, Vice- President, Prime Minister, Speaker and their counter parts in the states. But what is the requirement of providing security to judges? Why is security is given to those who are not in power and against whom cases are pending?"