HC wants to know who, why
TAKING A serious view of the practice to provide security in violation of government order, the Allahabad High Court has directed the principal secretary (Home), UP, to submit a report indicating the number of persons who have been provided security in the last one year and the reasons for security in each case.india Updated: May 30, 2006 01:39 IST
TAKING A serious view of the practice to provide security in violation of government order, the Allahabad High Court has directed the principal secretary (Home), UP, to submit a report indicating the number of persons who have been provided security in the last one year and the reasons for security in each case.
Passing this directive, a Division Bench comprising Justice Imtiyaz Murtaza and Justice Amar Saran also directed the state government to state in its reply exactly how many persons involved in criminal cases were provided with security, and the shortfall in the number of police personnel required for manning police stations and other duties. The report shall also indicate the period for which the security was given, whether any payment had been taken for providing security, the basis for providing additional security and whether there had been periodical reviews of the need for security by the committee as provided by the Government Order, the Court directed.
Further, the Court directed the state government to mention in its report the steps to be taken by the Government for reduction of unnecessary security.
Henceforth, the Court directed, the district level committee or the SSPs/SPs should mention reasons in their orders for providing security, so that the Court may be in a position to evaluate whether it was justified in a particular case and was in accordance with the letter and spirit of the Government Order. “The relevant government orders dealing with the subject of the provision of gunners and other security personnel may also be annexed with the reply of the state,” the Court directed. The court directed to list this case on July 12 for further orders.
In the present writ petition (no-5520 of 2006), petitioner Gayur Hasan lodged an FIR against one Meharban and four others at police station Babri district Muzaffarnagar alleging that they killed his younger brother Manzoor Hasan on October 14, 2005. Another brother of the petitioner, Zakir, had received injuries in this case. He pointed out that Meharban had not been arrested in spite of his involvement in this case and, in fact, he was provided with a security guard.
The petitioner, therefore, requested for withdrawal of the security guard provided to Meharban and also for his arrest. Expressing shock over it, the court directed that the gunner provided to the Meharban be withdrawn with immediate effect, in case it had not already been withdrawn. The court also directed the present investigation officer to conclude the investigation against Meharban forthwith and to take steps for his arrest, if needed.