Back
VINOD S. BHARDWAJ
Talbir Singh Gill – Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab – Respondent
JUDGMENT (Oral)
Mr. Vinod S. Bhardwaj, J.
Prayer in the present petition is to grant personal security to the petitioner, who is apprehending danger and threat to his life on account of being an active person in political affairs and in public life.
2. The petitioner claimed that he is associated with a political party namely Shiromani Akali Dal (B) and has been the General Secretary of Majha Zone of Youth Akali Dal and is also core committee member of Youth Akali Dal. It is claimed that the petitioner has also remained political advisor to Ex- Minister in the Government and has been an Officer on Special Duty to the said Ex-Minister. He also claims to have contested the election for being elected as a Member of Legislative Assembly from Amritsar (South) Constituency. Despite having lost, he has been working hard for the wellbeing of the residents of his constituency. It is contended that the anti-social elements and gangsters have been extending threats to persons who are involved in public life and espousing public concern and matters relating to the law and order situation in Punjab. The petitioner suspected that he is being followed by anti-social elements and have submitted repr
Profession - Refusal to provide petitioner personal security - High court while exercising writ jurisdiction under Art 226 of Constitution, cannot substitute its decision to decision of competent Aut....
Security assessments for political leaders fall within the jurisdiction of designated security agencies, and courts cannot intervene unless there is a clear failure to act.
Article 21 protects against state action but does not guarantee police protection to individuals whose threat perceptions arise from their own criminal activities.
A person with a criminal background cannot claim state-funded police protection when threats arise from their own activities, as this contradicts public morality.
The court affirmed that the assessment of personal security needs is a factual matter for authorities, rejecting claims based on perceived threats and discouraging the creation of a privileged class ....
Security provision is contingent on current threat assessments, which must be evaluated by the Security Review Committee, and not guaranteed based on past positions.
The court emphasized the need for a comprehensive threat assessment before withdrawing personal security, recognizing the dynamic nature of threats faced by individuals in political and business cont....
Assessment of real threat perception and granting security at the state's cost only in compelling cases linked to public or national service.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
