JUDGMENT :

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Chief Standing Counsel.

2. This writ petition has been filed praying for the following relief:

(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the order dated 16.06.2021 (letter dated 17.06.2021 passed by respondent no. 2/District Magistrate/District Level Security Committee Prayagraj, District – Prayagraj.

(b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing to the respondent no. 2 to take appropriate action and provide the security to petitioner.

3. Briefly stated facts of the present case are that according to the petitioner he is a witness in Case Crime No. 0057 of 2018, dated 10.06.2018, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 504, 302 IPC P.S. Holagarh, District – Prayagraj. Earlier by Order dated 21.08.2020, iqfyl mik/kh{kd ^^ÁKku** Á;kxjkt intimated the petitioner that there is no need for protection. Consequently, the petitioner filed the Writ C No. 27614 of 2020 which was allowed and a direction was issued to the District Level Committee/Superintendent of Police, Prayagraj, to pass an order afresh in accordance with law in the light of the directions of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mahender Chawla and Others Vs. Union of India and Others (2019) 14 SCC 615. Again the respondents passed almost identical order on 17.06.2021 refusing to grant protection to the petitioner. Consequently, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that after this Court passed the order dated 05.10.2021, the respondents are giving protection on dates fixed in the trial which shall continue till the conclusion of the trial.

5. Learned Chief Standing Counsel submits that protection has been provided to the petitioner by order dated 13.10.2021. He further submits that the State Government has taken a decision to implement the Witness Protection Scheme, 2018 and has taken several steps and it is being fully implemented.

6. To support his submissions, the learned Chief Standing Counsel has referred several paragraphs of the personal affidavit of the Secretary (Home) State of U.P. dated 08.11.2021.

7. We have carefully considered the submissions of learned counsels for the parties.

8. We find that Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mahender Chawla (Supra) approved the Witness Protection Scheme, 2018 which is reproduced below:

Witness Protection Scheme, 2018

PREFACE

Aims & Objective:

The ability of a witness to give testimony in a judicial setting or to cooperate with law enforcement and investigations without fear of intimidation or reprisal is essential in maintaining the Rule of law. The objective of this Scheme is to ensure that the investigation, prosecution and trial of criminal offences is not prejudiced because witnesses are intimidated or frightened to give evidence without protection from violent or other criminal recrimination. It aims to promote law enforcement by facilitating the protection of persons who are involved directly or indirectly in providing assistance to criminal law enforcement agencies and overall administration of Justice. Witnesses need to be given the confidence to come forward to assist law enforcement and Judicial Authorities with full assurance of safety. It is aimed to identify series of measures that may be adopted to safeguard witnesses and their family members from intimidation and threats against their lives, reputation and property.

Need and justification for the scheme:

Jeremy Bentham has said that "Witnesses are the eyes and ears of justice." In cases involving influential people, witnesses turn hostile because of threat to life and property. Witnesses find that there is no legal obligation by the state for extending any security.

The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India also held in State of Gujarat v. Anirudh Singh MANU/SC/0749/1997 : (1997)