The responsibility of authorities to protect the life and liberty of citizens is paramount, and decisions regarding security cover should consider the persistency of threat perception.

1. Prema Devi wife of Om Prakash is before this Court, assailing the validity of the decision dated 28th April, 2015 passed by the High Level Committee and communicated under the signatures of Deputy Secretary, Uttar Pradesh on 6th May 2015, wherein a resolve in question has been taken not to provide security cover to the petitioner at the expense of State exchequer.

2. Brief background of the case as is reflected from pleadings that has come forward is that a criminal case in question has been got registered bearing Case Crime No. 89 of 2013 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 427, 504, 506, 352, 354, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B IPC, Police Station- Shivpur, District- Varanasi by the petitioner complaining therein that she has been subjected to criminal activity and further she has also given details of the incumbents behind the said crime in question who are no one else but near and dear of one renowned 'Mafia Don' of the eastern region of the State of UP.

3. This is also reflected in the present case that in consonance with the Government Order dated 9th May, 2014 looking to threat perception in question, security cover had been provided to the petitioner at both the level is the District Level Committee and as well as Division Level Security Committee. Both District Level Committee and Divisional Level Committee, can provide security cover for limited period. Maximum period for which security cover can be provided is three months each, and thereafter, in further security is to be provided then ultimate call in the said direction is required to be taken by the State Level Committee and accordingly in regard to extension of facility of security cover to the petitioner, a recommendation in question has been made by the local officials as well as the higher officials and at the point of time when the matter has been taken by the State Level Committee, in its meeting a resolve has been taken that there is no real threat perception to her life as such resolve is being taken not to provide security cover to the petitioner, this decision has impelled the petitioner to be before us.

4. To the challenge in question that has been so raised before us a counter affidavit has been filed and the counter affidavit in question proceeds to speak that the incumbent against whom a large scale allegations have been levelled, he is confined in jail for more than two year and security cover had been provided to the petitioner for the last two years and no untoward incident took place of any kind whatsoever against the petitioner as such there is no justification to provide security.

5. A rejoinder affidavit has been filed repeating the averments mentioned therein and reiterating therein that still threat perception continues and before the trial Court, the accused persons are not at all cooperating in the matter.

6. After respective pleadings have been exchanged, the present writ petition in question has been taken for final hearing and disposal.

7. Sri Syed Safdar Ali Kazmi appearing along with Sri Ashish Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted before this Court that once recommendation has been made from all levels that according threat perception still exists and case is made out for security cover to the petitioner, then merely by saying that in the opinion of the State Level Committee there is no threat perception has to be termed as totally arbitrary decision, and the said decision has to be accepted as without looking into the original recommendation made by the authorities who were much more conversant of threat perception to the life of the petitioner.

8. Learned Standing Counsel, on the other hand, has contended that the valid reason has been assigned for not providing security cover to the petitioner.

9. After respective arguments have been advanced, the factual situation on which there is no dispute that petitioner has been subjected to criminal activity, and this is also equally accepted position that has been car