Aastha Thakur
Published on: October 10, 2022, at 06:45 IST
The Madras High Court ordered the state government to file a reply to a petition seeking to constitute a dedicated Anti–Terrorism Squad (ATS) in the state. The Divisional Bench of Acting Chief Justice T Raja and Justice D Krishnakumar postponed the counter arguments of the state by four weeks.
The petition was filed by one B. Jagannath, stating that for the maintenance of law and order it is necessary to have technology having zero default and support from counter-terrorism. He next argued in his plea that Tamil Nadu is a geopolitical region and it is the duty of the state to protect its citizens from any such politically motivated danger.
Hence, he stressed the need to establish an ATS. In order to make his case, he also mentioned existing threats within the state, such as the LTTE and Radical Islamic Terrorists.
The petitioner further submits that although Tamil Nadu has its own marine sea police, they are not working efficiently due to a lack of patrol boats whose strength is even less than 50 presently. These boats do not even have proper Zero Emergent Critical Strike Maritime functioning devices.
In support of his arguments on Monday before the Bench, the petitioner also referred to certain newspaper reports which claimed that there was a rise in Islamic fundamentalism and that there were high chances of the existence of Jihadi elements from Pakistan and Afghanistan.
However, Justice T. Raja was uncertain and not satisfied with such arguments.
The bench observes that the State Border Police and the NCG (National Coast Guard) were already doing their job effectively and that they were also implementing all necessary security measures. The court also asked the petitioner to not give vague and baseless arguments, but instead cites the specific instances which show the necessity for the setting up of the ATS.
The petitioner referred to Mumbai police after the 2008 attacks. They set up the ATS. Apart from that, states such as Kerala and Karnataka also established ATS even though they still have not witnessed any terrorist activity.
The counsel, Advocate General R Shunmughasundaram, argued against the set up of ATS, stating that there are already sufficient police forces in the state to deal with security issues. Furthermore, it was also added that as the plea of the petitioner deals with security issues, the relied and directions should be sought from the Union Government and not the state government.
Thus, he pleaded with the Court to dismiss the petition as the HC has no jurisdiction to entertain it.
Case Title: B Jagannath v The Chief Secretary and Ors