Frequent breakdowns of all three lifts at Pune District Court’s new building in Shivajinagar have raised safety and accessibility concerns for more than 5,000 daily visitors, including litigants, lawyers, police personnel, senior citizens and persons with disabilities.
Advocate Balasaheb Khopade, a former Additional Public Prosecutor and former general secretary of the Maharashtra State Public Prosecutors Association, Nagpur, has urged Pune District and Principal Judge Anju Shende to direct immediate and permanent measures to address the reported failures.
According to Khopade, people have been trapped inside the lifts, while the building allegedly lacks adequate emergency rescue arrangements, attendants and backup power. He has called for coordination between the court administration, lift maintenance officials, the Public Works Department and technical maintenance teams to review the equipment’s safety, upkeep and accessibility.
Khopade said he was among those trapped in a lift on October 8 after a power failure. He and the other occupants were rescued with the help of government pleader Santoshkumar Patale, according to the report. Khopade has said the incident demonstrates the need to prioritise the safety of everyone visiting the court premises.
The new District Court building contains more than 40 courtrooms, as well as offices of government pleaders, the District Legal Services Authority and the bailiff. Despite the scale of activity, the building has only three lifts, which reportedly malfunction frequently. The reported absence of backup power has added to concerns that occupants could remain trapped during electricity interruptions.
The access issue is particularly significant for people who cannot easily use stairs. Senior citizens and persons with disabilities may depend on the lifts to reach courtrooms and administrative offices, making reliable vertical access a basic requirement for their participation in legal proceedings and access to public services.
Khopade has also sought appropriate directions in accordance with the Bombay High Court’s guidelines so that permanent measures are introduced to prevent such incidents and provide safe access throughout the court building. The requested review includes the condition and maintenance of the lifts, emergency rescue arrangements, power backup and the availability of personnel to respond to breakdowns.
The report does not specify whether the court administration, the Public Works Department or the lift maintenance agency has issued a response to the concerns. The next step sought by the advocate is an administrative review involving the court authorities and the officials responsible for maintaining the building’s lift systems.
