Punjab-Haryana High Court
Manik Suri And Another vs State Of Punjab And Others on 8 August, 2024
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:104178
CWP-28832-2022 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
257 CWP-28832-2022
Date of decision:08.08.2024
Manik Suri & anr. ...Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab & ors. ...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ
Present : None for the petitioner.
Ms. Akshita Chauhan, DAG, Punjab.
VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral)
1. Prayer in the present writ petition is for directing official respondents for providing Z security to the petitioners and their entire family members and for protection of their life and personal liberty.
2. Status report has already been filed on behalf of respondents No.1 to 8 by way of affdavit of Ajay Kumar, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Security, Punjab. As per the averments contained in the said reply, the assailants, who opened fire on father of petitioner No.1 have already been arrested in FIR No.311, dated 04.11.2022 registered under Section 302 IPC and Sections 25, 27, 54 and 59 of the Arms Act. It is acknowledged by the State that the threat to the petitioners cannot be ruled out and presently 21 police personnel have been deployed as gunmen/PSOs and House Guards with the petitioners and their family members. It is further averred that there is no need to provide any more security cover to them.
3. The relevant extract of the above said status report reads thus:-
"4. That State intelligence, has reported that the 1 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 14-08-2024 21:47:22 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:104178 CWP-28832-2022 -2- petitioners Sh. Manik Suri is National Chairman, Shiv Sena (Taksali) and running a transport company in the name of "Sai Transport Company" and Smt. Madhu Suri is widow of Late Sh. Sudhir Kumar Suri who was shot dead by one Sandeep Singh Sunny on 04.11 2022. In this regard a criminal case FIR No.311, dated 04.11.2022 u/s 302 IPC 25- 27, 54, 59 Arms Act has been registered at PS Sadar, Amritsar Rural against the accused person. The Accused person is presently lodged in Jail. Also, it is further reported that the threat to life of family members of Sh. Sudhir Kumar Suri, cannot be ruled out.
5. That Senior Superintendent of Police, Amritsar Rural, has reported that the petitioner Manik Suri, is Chairman of Shiv Sena Taksali, after the death of his father Sh. Sudhir Kumar Suri. The petitioner Manik Suri feels threatened from anti- social elements after the murder of his father Sudhir Kumar Suri. Presently 21 police personnel are deployed as gunmen/PSOs and House Guard with petitioner Manik Suri, Smt. Madhu Suri and their family members. There is no need to provide any more security cover to the petitioners.
6. That it is humbly submitted that the norms and guidelines for providing security to individual protectees have been laid down in the State Security Policy, which are notified by the Punjab Government on 02.09.2013, in pursuance of the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP No. 25237 of 2010 in case titled "Abhay Singh v/s State of UP and others". The respondents are bound by the norms and guidelines laid down in the State Security Policy. According to the State Security Policy, personal security cover to an individual may be provided either on the basis of position held by the individual or on the basis of an assessment of threat perception. The evaluation of threat is carried out on the basis of an elaborate threat assessment 2 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 14-08-2024 21:47:23 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:104178 CWP-28832-2022 -3- exercise, which involves an objective appraisal of latest threat inputs received from the State Intelligence Wing, local police, and in certain cases, from the Central agencies as well. The office of the respondent i e. Addl. Director General of Police, Security, Punjab, is the competent authority for carrying out assessment of threat perception and for the deployment/withdrawal of security cover accordingly.
7. In view of the above mentioned facts and circumstance, it has been decided by this office that 21 police personnel deployed with the petitioners shall continue with the petitioners, on purely temporary basis, subject to periodic reviews as per the guidelines laid down in the State Security Policy-2013. However directions have been issued to Commissioner of Police, Amritsar and Senior Superintendent of Police, Amritsar Rural to adequately sensitize the local police to take suitable, need based preventive measures and also provide area security so as to avoid any untoward incident. In the light of the above facts and circumstances, it is respectfully prayed that the present writ petition may kindly be dismissed / disposed, of in the interest of justice."
4. It is, thus, contended that the State is cognizant and alive to the issue before this Court and appropriate security arrangements have already been made by the respondents.
5. I do not find as to how the said security cover is inadequate.
Under the given circumstances, no further directions are required to be issued in the present writ petition and the same is disposed of as having been rendered infructuous.
08.08.2024 (VINOD S. BHARDWAJ)
monika JUDGE
Whether reasoned/speaking: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
3 of 3
::: Downloaded on - 14-08-2024 21:47:23 :::