Back
P&H High Court Orders Punjab to Protect MP Harbhajan Singh Amid Security Row
In a significant interim directive, the has ordered the Punjab government to ensure
"no physical injury is caused to petitioner or his family members while they are in the State of Punjab."
The ruling came in response to a petition by Rajya Sabha MP Harbhajan Singh, a former cricketer who recently defected from the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) to the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), challenging the abrupt withdrawal of his Y-category security cover. Justice Jagmohan Bansal, hearing the matter, issued a notice to the state and fixed the next hearing for May 12, 2025. This intervention underscores growing judicial scrutiny over politically tinged decisions on VIP security in India's volatile political landscape.
The case highlights tensions between state executive powers and the fundamental right to life and personal liberty under , especially for public figures like MPs navigating high-threat environments.
Background on Harbhajan Singh's Political Journey
Harbhajan Singh, one of India's most celebrated off-spin bowlers with over 700 international wickets, played pivotal roles in the 2007 T20 World Cup and 2011 ODI World Cup triumphs. Transitioning from cricket to politics, he was nominated to the Rajya Sabha by AAP in 2022. Sources indicate he received threats post-election, prompting to provide Y-category security—a mid-level protection typically for individuals facing credible threats, involving armed personnel and close protection.
On April 24, 2024, AAP faced a major setback when seven of its 10 Rajya Sabha MPs, including Singh, announced their resignation and merger with BJP. MP Raghav Chadha revealed the move, citing AAP's deviation from its
"principles, values, and core morals."
Six of the seven were from Punjab: Harbhajan Singh, Ashok Mittal, Sandeep Pathak, Rajinder Gupta, Vikramjit Sahney, and Swati Maliwal. This mass defection amplified political friction in Punjab, a state with a history of acrimonious party switches and law-order challenges.
Protests erupted immediately, with AAP workers targeting defectors' residences in Jalandhar and Ludhiana. Walls were defaced with "gaddar" (traitor) graffiti, signaling deep resentment.
Timeline of Security Withdrawal and Mob Incident
Singh's security was withdrawn on April 25-26, 2024, by the Additional Director General of Police (Security), allegedly without fresh threat assessment, notice, or hearing. The petitioner claims this was executed in a "very vindictive manner" on AAP-influenced local regime instructions. Notably,
"the official respondents did not even leave a single police personnel in the security of the petitioner and his family members, and took out the complete security cover, leaving the security of the family of the petitioner vulnerable."
On April 25 morning, all police left his Jalandhar home. The Deputy Commissioner reportedly permitted AAP protests. By 2:30 PM, a mob arrived, spray-painting "gaddar" on walls and attempting to break the front gate. Singh, then in Mumbai for a personal event, was informed by his brother-in-law. The plea alleges the attack occurred
"in the presence of the local Jalandhar ACP (East) and SHO, Sub Division No. 7,"
with police as "mute spectators" rather than interveners.
"The recent mob attack at the petitioner's residence on April 25 itself is a testimony to the live and real threat faced by the petitioner,"
the petition states. Singh's family—including his aged mother, wife, 10-year-old daughter, and five-year-old son—now lives in "constant fear and apprehension," disrupting daily life.
Post-withdrawal, the Centre deployed outside his residence, but Singh seeks restoration of state-provided cover for comprehensive protection during Punjab travels for parliamentary duties.
Details of the Petition and Allegations
Filed as a writ petition, Singh's plea brands the withdrawal
"highly illegal, unjustified, and totally arbitrary."
Key arguments: -
No Threat Reassessment:
Security wing provided no justification; reductions must be phased based on reports. -
Political Vendetta:
Timed post-defection, amid Punjab's tense law-order, suggesting "motivated by political vendetta." -
Police Complicity:
Jalandhar Commissioner directed for arrangements, but none made; facilitation of attack. -
MP Duties Exposure:
As a sitting Rajya Sabha MP, extensive Punjab travel heightens risks.
The petition demands immediate restoration, emphasizing vulnerability without state protection.
High Court's Interim Directions
Justice Jagmohan Bansal's bench responded swiftly:
"The respondent shall ensure that no physical injury is caused to petitioner or his family members while they are in the State of Punjab."
A notice of motion was issued, with May 12 as the next date. This non-bailable directive binds the state to proactive protection, pending full merits hearing.
Legal Arguments and Analysis
At core, this pits administrative discretion against constitutional safeguards. Security allocation for VIPs follows guidelines (e.g., 2017 MHA review), mandating intelligence-based threat categorizations (Z, Y, X). Withdrawals require reassessment by multi-agency committees, not unilateral ADGP orders.
Singh's counsel likely invokes (equality/arbitrariness) and Article 21 (right to life) , arguing ex parte withdrawal denies natural justice. Police inaction implicates (FIR duty) and state tort liability for negligence. Courts have intervened similarly: In (P&H HC, 2020s context), arbitrary downgrades were quashed; SC in (2022) stressed threat-based, non-discriminatory security.
Political motive claims echo (defection anti-floor crossing) but extend to executive vendetta. If proven, it could invite scrutiny (Union duty to protect states from internal disturbance) or probe. Punjab's AAP-BJP rivalry, post-2022 assembly polls, amplifies bias perceptions.
Broader Context: VIP Security Protocols in India
India's VIP security ecosystem is vast—over 500 protectees per 2023 data—costing billions. Post-26/11, protocols emphasize for PM/family, for others, state police for Y/X. Withdrawals spiked during political shifts: 2024 saw similar cuts for opposition leaders in non-BJP states.
In Punjab, Khalistan shadows and farmer protests heighten MP threats. Defecting from ruling AAP invited backlash, mirroring 2022 Haryana Congress-to-BJP switches with security tweaks. CRPF fill-in highlights federalism tensions—states resent Centre overrides, yet gaps expose lapses.
Implications for Legal Practice and the Justice System
For constitutional litigators, this is a playbook: Urgent interim relief via writs, leveraging mob incidents as "irreparable harm." Evidence like videos/police logs strengthens cases. Practice tip: Pair with RTI for threat reports, forcing disclosure.
Broader ripple: Deters political weaponization of security, bolstering defection democracy under 10th Schedule. Reinforces police reforms (e.g., PADMA report) for impartiality. Punjab lawyers may see surge in similar PILs amid 2027 polls.
Judiciary's role as "safety valve" shines—swift orders prevent escalation, upholding Rule of Law in polarized politics.
Next Steps and Conclusion
With May 12 hearing, expect arguments on restoration, assessment mandates. Punjab may counter with "routine review" claims, but attack evidence weighs heavy.
This episode—from cricket pitch to courtroom—exemplifies how personal security intersects politics and law. The High Court's directive not only shields Singh but signals: State protection trumps partisan pique, safeguarding democracy's custodians.
