Page 1

1

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION (C) NO.252 OF 2004

SUBHAS DATTA                                …PETITIONER

VERSUS

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.                   …RESPONDENTS

J U D G M E N T

ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J.

1. This  petition has been filed as public  interest  litigation on the  

issue of protection of historical objects preserved at different places in  

the country particularly in various museums.  Prayer in the petition is  

for  a  direction  for  adequate  security  arrangements  and  for  proper  

investigation  into  the  incidents  of  theft  and  damage  to  several  

historical objects and also for making an inventory of available articles  

for future.   

2. Initially, the respondent in the writ petition was the Union of India  

through Ministry of Human Resource Development but by order of this  

Court  dated  7th July,  2008,  the  Director  General,  National  Museum,  

Janpath,  New Delhi;   the Director  General,  Archaeological  Survey of  

India, Janpath, New Delhi; the Director, National Gallery of Modern Art,  

Jaipur House, India Gate, New Delhi; the Director, India Museum, 27,

Page 2

2

Jawaharlal  Nehru  Road,  Kolkata;  the  Secretary  &  Curator,  Victoria  

Memorial Hall, 1, Queen Way, Kolkata; the General Secretary, Asiatic  

Society,  1,  Park  Street,  Kolkata;  the  Director,  Salar  Jung  Museum,  

Hyderabad;  the  Acting  Director,  Allahabad  Museum,  Allahabad;  the  

Director, Nehru Memorial Museum & Library, Teen Murti House, New  

Delhi were impleaded as parties as the said respondents are directly  

concerned with the issue raised in the petition.

3. Immediate trigger for the petitioner appears to be the theft of  

historical  artefacts  of  Kabiguru Rabindra  Nath  Tagore,  kept  in  the  

museum of Viswabharati University at Santiniketan in West Bengal of  

which Prime Minister is the Chancellor.  Reference has been made in  

the petition to the incident of stealing of golden coins from the Asiatic  

Society of Calcutta in the year 1990.  Further reference has been made  

to theft from the Nandan Art Gallery of Viswabharati University in the  

year  1984  and  also  the  incidents  of  thefts  in  Victoria  Memorial   

at Calcutta.    

4. Case set out in the petition is that the material at various centres  

like Asiatic Society, National Library, Viswabharati University, Victoria  

Memorial  and  other  Indian  Museums  is  national  asset  which  needs  

safety, security, preservation and maintenance.  Under Article 49 of  

the  Constitution,  the  State  is  under  obligation  to  protect  every  

monument, place or object of artistic or historic interest declared to be  

of  national  importance  from  spoilation,  disfigurement,  destruction,

Page 3

3

removal, disposal or export, as the case may be.  Under Article 51A(f)  

of the Constitution, there is fundamental duty to value and preserve  

the rich heritage of our composite culture.   There should be proper  

inventory of  all  historical  objects  preserved at  different  centres and  

such inventory should be kept at a central place under the Government  

of India.  There should be periodical stock taking by an independent  

agency.  Ancient Monuments Preservation Act,  1904 requires proper  

preservation of objects of archaeological, historical, or artistic interest.  

Reference  has  also  been  made  to  Prevention  of  Damage  of  Public  

Property  Act,  1984  to  state  that  any  damage  to  public  property  is  

national loss.   

5. In response to the writ petition, a counter affidavit has been filed  

on behalf  of  the Union of  India by the Director,  Ministry of  Culture,  

acknowledging  that  theft  of  Nobel  Prize  Medal  from  Viswabharti  

University at Santiniketan was a matter of grave concern.  It is further  

stated that the CBI has been entrusted with the task of investigation,  

but no report has been received.  Similarly, incident of theft of golden  

coins from Asiatic Society of Calcutta has been acknowledged as a fact  

for which investigation was undertaken but closed.   There is no report  

about the recovery of the lost objects.  Theft at Victoria Memorial is  

also acknowledged and it is stated that the answering respondent was  

in agreement with the petitioner that all possible steps should be taken  

by  the  concerned  organizations  for  the  proper  safety,  security,

Page 4

4

preservation and maintenance of  artefacts under their  custody.   The  

Union of India was taking every possible step for safety of artefacts in  

the  custody  of  Museums/Organizations  controlled  by  them.   The  

artefacts  are  scattered  all  over  the  country  in  various  museums  

controlled by the State Government and also with Private Museums  

who have their own security systems.  The Government of India had  

entrusted the security to the CISF wherever it was felt necessary. The  

security scenario is reviewed from time to time.  It was not possible to  

take  responsibility  of  entire  private  and  State  Government  owned  

Museums and it was also not financially feasible to do so. The Ministry  

of  Culture,  provides  funds  for  museums  to  acquire  equipments.    

A meeting was convened on 8th April, 2004 by the Ministry of Culture  

on  issues  relating  to  security.   A  Committee  was set  up  under  the  

chairmanship of Director General, National Museum, for assessing the  

security needs of various museums.  The museums under the Ministry  

of Culture have been advised to follow security norms suggested by  

the Committee.  It may not be financially viable to deploy a specialized  

force at all places where the administration and custody of artefacts is  

either in the State Governments or in private hands, but privately run  

security agencies could be hired for the purpose.  The Museums under  

the  administrative  control  of  Ministry  of  Culture  were  keeping  the  

inventory of art objects which were verified from time to time.  The  

state organizations were engaged in the programme of digitization of

Page 5

5

artefacts.   Initiatives  were  being  taken  in  mission  mode for  proper  

documentation  of  artefacts  and  monuments.  The  Antiquities  &  Art  

Treasures Act, 1972 is in place to provide legal safeguards.   

6. According to the guidelines annexed to the counter affidavit there  

should be four layer coverage for  external  and internal  security  for  

museums by guarding perimeter at entry points, galleries, surveillance  

through  manual  and  electronic  gadgets  and  intangible  intelligence.  

There should be effective Access Control System (ACS); security should  

be with a single agency; Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) should  

be rehearsed at regular intervals;  Galleries and Security Points should  

have Intercom Networking;  a Contingency Plan should be prepared to  

deal  with  fire/smoke;  robbery;  power  failure;   spotting  a  suspicious  

person on CCTV monitor;  there should be regulation of movements of  

daily wagers/private workers for repair and maintenance;  there should  

be  least  number  of  entry/exit  points;   preventive  and  deterrent  

measures should be increased; Door Framed Metal Detector (DFMD)  

should be installed at the main entrance;  Hand Heed Metal Detector  

(HHMD) should be provided to security staff;  CCTV cameras should be  

installed  at  different  locations;   Walkie-Talkie  and  Intercom  facility  

should be provided at each security point;   there should be Control  

Room to coordinate functioning of museum and security staff; there  

should be Auto Camera at the main entrance.    Infra-red Alarm system  

or Punched Taped Concertina or Electric Fencing should be installed at

Page 6

6

the  perimeter  of  the  Museum  building.   The  grills  in  the  windows  

should  be  re-enforced.   There  should  be  baggage  X-Ray  machine.  

There should be Electronic Locks (Magnetic) for all doors of Galleries,  

Storages  and  Strong  Rooms.   Visitor  flow  should  be  regulated  by  

Biometric  Photography system.  Internal  intelligence staff  should be  

employed.  Every museum should carry out security audit and impart  

orientation  programme in  strategic  areas.   Safe  keeping  of  keys  of  

Museum should be ensured.  A Curator should be deputed for opening  

and closing of the museum.  Gallery locks should be installed.  Regular  

drill should be carried out at least once in three months.  There should  

be  Spatial  Planning  for  Security  which  should  be  aesthetically  

attractive with a consistent Signage System, service units should not  

remain in gallery areas.  There should be stand-by Automatic Power  

Back-Up System.  There should be bullet-proof glass for vulnerable art  

objects and jewellery items should be stored in the Strong Room.  Infra-

red System or painting gallery and Electronic Sensor Tags should be  

used for displayed objects.  6mm to 8mm thickness of glass should be  

used  for  table  showcases.   Police  verification  of  workers  should  be  

carried out.  Preventive and Fire Fighting Measures should be adopted,  

smoke  detectors  should  be  installed.   Fire  alarm system should  be  

installed.   Electronic  choke  should  be  used  in  showcases.   Tripping  

system  should  be  strengthened  for  identification  of  short  circuits.  

Inspection of fire fighting in the electronic system should be carried

Page 7

7

out.  Minimum wooden items should be used in galleries, fire resistant  

cloth, cupboard and locker should be used for partition.  The Standing  

Committee  of  the  Museum  should  ensure  that  plug  points  are  not  

broken,  conduited  electrical  wiring  should  be  used  and  electrical  

fittings  are  replaced.   The  museum should  have  technical  staff  for  

Curatorial/Technical/Official  Management.   Record  should  be  

maintained properly as per detailed guidelines laid down.

7. Noticing  the  stand  in  the  counter  affidavit,  this  Court  on   

12th August,  2005 directed the Ministry to file a better and detailed  

affidavit about the implementation of the recommendations and the  

results achieved.   The Ministry was also directed to  consider giving  

specialized  training  in  respect  of  security  and  also  to  consider  the  

suggestion of verification being done by outside agencies.  

8. Accordingly, an additional affidavit was filed on 9th January, 2006  

stating  that  the  matter  was  reviewed  by  the  Security  Committee  

headed by Director General, National Museum.  The recommendation  

was  forwarded  to  the  selected  museums  and  also  to  the  State  

Governments.  The State Governments were also requested to apply  

for financial assistance for equipment relating to security systems for  

which  a  provision  of  Rs.2500 lakhs  was  made.   The  Trusts,  Private  

Bodies and Semi Govt.  Bodies have their  separate security systems  

based  on  their  needs  and  locations  and  perception  of  theft.   With  

regard to museums under the control of Ministry of Culture, the status

Page 8

8

of  security  arrangements  has  been  indicated.   According  to  the  

affidavit,  recommendations  of  Security  Committee  have  been  

implemented by various museums and some recommendations were  

in  the  process  of  implementation.   It  has  been  further  stated  that  

though the physical verification is regularly done by museum staff, the  

idea  of  entrusting  physical  verification  to  outside  agency  has  been  

accepted in principle.  As regards specialized training, it is stated that  

security of National Museum and Salar Jung Museum has been handed  

over to CISF, while security of IGRMS-Bhopal, NMML, New Delhi, NGMA-

Mumbai and New Delhi are being looked after by their own security  

staff viz. Security Assistant, Gallery Attendant, Chowkidars etc.  It  is  

not financially feasible to organize a special force for the security of  

Museums spread all  over the country, as the various museums/sites  

are under the control of various agencies such as Central Government,  

State  Government,  Semi  Government  Bodies,  Trusts,  Private  Bodies  

etc.  

9. An affidavit has also been filed by Under Secretary, Government  

of  India,  Ministry  of  Culture  on  22nd October,  2007  in  response  to  

additional  affidavit  of  the  petitioner  annexing  the  status  report  on  

implementation of recommendation of Security Committee at various  

organizations. It is stated that physical verification has been done by  

outside agency in the case of National Museum and such verification  

was in progress in certain other museums.  Museums under the control

Page 9

9

of Ministry of Culture were in the process of computerizing the details  

of the artefacts.  There are internal physical verification systems under  

which artefacts are verified at regular intervals in museums under the  

control of Ministry of Culture.  Physical verification is specialized job  

which  should  be  done  only  by  experts.   A  Committee  for  physical  

verification  was  constituted  under  the  Chairmanship  of  Shri  M.N.  

Deshpande, retired Director General, ASI which was reconstituted by  

substituting  Shri  M.  Varadarajan,  former  Secretary  (Culture)  in   

April,  1999.  National Museum had more than 2 lakhs works of art,  

which were physically verified by the Committee in a phased manner.  

Physical verification of art objects in Indian Museum, Kolkata was being  

done by outside experts.  Verification of art objects in Victoria Memorial  

Hall  was being done by internal verification agency.  Theft of Nobel  

Prize Medal from Viswabharti Museum and Fifth Century Buddha Head  

from Indian Museum,  Kolkata  were  being investigated by CBI.   The  

issues emerging in the observations of audit were being addressed.  

The modalities for relocation of all the administrative and other service  

units outside the museum premises were being worked out.  Affidavits  

have also been filed on behalf of the Salar Jung Museum, Hyderabad,  

Allahabad  Museum,  Archaeological  Survey  of  India,  in  response  to  

directions of this Court.   

10. On 10th January, 2013, the CBI was directed to apprise the Court  

about the progress of investigation relating to missing of Budha Bust

Page 10

10

and other cases in question.  The Ministry of Culture was also directed  

to respond to the affidavit of the Director, Indian Museum that due to  

shortage of manpower and absence of scholars and experts in Indian  

Museum, Kolkata, the work of verification which was started in the year  

2005 could not be completed even in seven years.  The Ministry of  

Culture was directed to look into the matter and provide resources so  

that substantial  progress could be achieved.  The Ministry was also  

directed to look into the paucity of sufficient place as the Museum was  

not in a position to display its items and to maintain their museum.  

Directions  were  also  issued  for  completion  of  verification  of  the  

remaining items by the Victoria Memorial  Hall.   The Government of  

India  was  directed  to  look  into  the  requirement  for  residential  

accommodation for  the CISF staff  near Victoria  Memorial  Hall.   The  

State Government was also directed to look into this aspect.   

11. Thereafter affidavit dated 2nd April, 2013 has been filed on behalf  

of  the  Minister  stating  that  a  meeting  was  held  in  the  Ministry  to  

discuss the issue of physical verification of objects at Indian Museum,  

Kolkata  and Victoria  Memorial  Hall  and CISF  had agreed to  provide  

necessary staff for security subject to accommodation being provided.  

Affidavits dated 21st September, 2013 have also been filed on behalf of  

the  Victoria  Memorial  Hall  and  the  Indian  Museum  stating  that  

verification of all items available with it had almost been carried out  

and that the issue of security was also being sorted out.

Page 11

11

12. We have heard the petitioner in-person and learned counsel for  

the respondents.

13. The petitioner in person submits that inspite of various directions  

of this Court during pendency of this petition for the last more than ten  

years, the situation is still not satisfactory.  Neither the stolen articles  

have been recovered nor adequate security measures fully adopted.  

The updating of inventory and its cross checking needs to be ensured.   

14. Learned Additional Solicitor General and the learned counsel for  

the  respondents  fairly  stated  that  the  concern  of  the  petitioner  is  

genuine and there is every need to review the security measures and  

to update the inventory.  They assured the Court that the concern will  

be addressed and necessary steps in the matter will be taken.   

15. It can hardly be gainsaid that preservation of rich heritage and  

culture  of  the  country  is  a  constitutional  mandate.   In  UNESCO  

Convention  on  the  means  of  Prohibiting  and  Preventing  the  Illicit  

Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property adopted  

in the General Conference of the United Nations Educational, Scientific  

and  Cultural  Organization,  meeting  in  Paris  from   

12th October to 14th November 1970, at its sixteenth session, which has  

been duly ratified by India, the spirit  of the said mandate has been  

reiterated.  The International Council of Museums (ICOM) (working with  

the  support  of  UNESCO)  has  issued  guidelines  for  disaster  

preparedness in Museums which are well  known to those concerned

Page 12

12

with  the  management  of  Museums.   The  UNESCO  in  its  quarterly  

journal  “Museum” has  suggested  measures  for  security  of  museum  

objects in the light of studies undertaken by it.  Performance audit of  

preservation and conservation of  Monuments and Antiquities  is  also  

conducted by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG).   

In its 18th report of 2013, various observations have been made by   

the  CAG.   Learned  counsel  for  the  respondents  accept  the  legal  

position and also submit that the security and maintenance of historic  

artefacts requires serious and continuous efforts by technically trained  

persons.   The  challenges  pointed  out  by  the  respondents,  who  are  

running  and  managing  museums,  in  their  affidavits  that  there  are  

space  constraints,  manpower  shortage  and  lack  of  other  resources  

need to be looked into by the Ministry of Culture and other concerned  

authorities and appropriate monitoring mechanism needs to be put in  

place.   Requisite  funds  have  to  be  allocated  so  as  to  ensure  safe  

keeping of the valuable artefacts.   

16. In view of assurance of learned Additional Solicitor General and  

other counsel for the respondents, it may not be necessary to give any  

specific direction at this stage.  There is no reason to doubt the stand  

of  the  Central  Government  and  the  other  respondents  that  all  

necessary steps will be taken and reviewed from time to time.  This  

Court expects that the Secretary,  Ministry of Culture will  review the  

matter and take such necessary steps as may be identified within one

Page 13

13

month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.  Thereafter,  

review meetings may be held at least once in every six months to  

consider further course of action.  If any grievance survives, it will be  

open to any aggrieved person to take legal remedies in accordance  

with law.   

17. With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of.

……………………………………………………J.       (T.S. THAKUR)

……..…………...………………………………J.              (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL)

NEW DELHI FEBRUARY 3, 2015