1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (LG.) NO. 44 OF 2009 Gujrat Service Center & Ors. ...Petitioners Versus State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents. None for the Petitioners Mr. D.A. Nalawade, Government Pleader, for the State. CORAM: B ILAL NAZKI and SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, JJ. DATE: APRIL 29, 2009 P.C.:- Nobody appears for the petitioners. 2. This P.I.L. is filed by some businessmen having their business in the area where the Arthur Road Jail is situate. Their grievance is that a trial is going on in the Arthur Road Jail itself in connection with the 26/11 incidents in the City of Mumbai; and for this reason, a road has been closed by the respondents, which is causing not only inconvenience to the inhabitants, but also havoc for the business of the petitioners. 2 3. By an earlier order, this Court appointed Shri M.L. Tahiliyani, a Special Judge, as Commissioner, who has visited the spot and filed a report. His report also suggests that by closing the particular road to the traffic, inconvenience is caused to the petitioners commercially as well as to the inhabitants of the area. 4. We are conscious that security of the persons facing the trial and of the persons conducting the trial has to be ensured. We are also conscious that there should be no chance left for anybody to either stall the trial or do something which affects the trial. But we are also conscious of the fact that because of this trial, people should not be put to inconveniences, which are avoidable, both as far as commercial inconveniences and civil inconveniences are concerned. We have tried to find out a solution, so that both the interests are balanced. But in the absence of the opinion of experts, it becomes difficult for this Court to give any directions, although we had suggested certain alternatives, which we thought may work in the situation, but were not acceptable to the respondents. But as we cannot give any direction because of our own shortcomings relating to the expertise involved, we should not be heard to say that we will not do anything in the matter. 5. In these circumstances, we direct the Director General of 3 Police to appoint a Committee of Experts headed by an officer not below the rank of Commissioner, who shall take all aspects into consideration, and also the suggestions put forth by this Court before the parties during the hearing, which will be summarised in this order, and find out a solution, whereby people are put to minimum of inconvenience, without compromising the security of the trial or the accused or the persons involved with the trial. The Commissioner so appointed by the D.G.P. is also directed by us to take the views of Mr. J. Ribeiro, former D.G.P., before framing his opinion in the matter. 6. The whole matter shall be decided by the Committee within a week, and the measures suggested by the Committee shall be put in place immediately. 7. The suggestions which are made to the parties during the trial are: (1) that the road, which is closed, is a 25 ft. wide road, and a portion of it could be closed on the side adjacent to the wall of the jail, which could be a buffer between the wall of the jail and the road; and the other portion could be used for light vehicular traffic. 4 (2) that the road, which is at present operative for one-way traffic, could be opened for two-way traffic. These suggestions also be considered by the Committee of Experts. 8. With these observations, the P.I.L. is disposed of. 9. A copy of this order be given to the learned Government Pleader today, so that it is handed over to the D.G.P. A copy of the report submitted by Mr. Tahiliyani be also furnished to the D.G.P., and the Committee may take that also into consideration. BILAL NAZKI, J. SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J. 5 10. Mr. M.K. Jain, learned counsel for the petitioners, appeared at 3 p.m., and said that he was under the impression that the case shall be taken up at 3 p.m. On his suggestion, we further direct that the Committee appointed by the D.G.P. shall also take (into cosideration) the view of the inhabitants of the area through any representative of them before coming to the conclusions. BILAL NAZKI, J. SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.