Vidhyaram vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 1145 MP

                             1
                HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                 WP-4428-2021
             (VIDHYARAM Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)


Gwalior, Dated : 31.03.2021

      Heard through video conferencing.

      Shri H.K. Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner.

      Shri     G.K.    Agarwal,     learned   Govt.    Advocate      for   the

respondent/State.

The present petition has been filed being aggrieved by the action

on the part of the respondents/authorities, whereby, they are not taking

any protection with respect to the offence under Section 302 of IPC

against the respondents No. 5 to 7 bearing Crime No.74/2020

registered at Police Station Devgarh, District Morena.

It is submitted that petitioner's brother has been murdered by the

respondents No. 5 to 7 along with another co-accused who are in jail,

on the basis of which the aforesaid offence has been registered bearing

Crime No. 74/2020 by the police authorities for offence under Section

302 of IPC. It is submitted that some of the accused persons have been

released on bail and after granting bail, the accused persons are

compelling the petitioner and his family member who are the eye

witness of the aforesaid case. It is submitted that threat was given by

the accused persons that if compromise will not be done, then

petitioner has to face dire consequences. In such circumstances,

cancellation of bail has been preferred by the petitioner which are

pending consideration till date. He has relied upon the judgment passed

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH WP-4428-2021 (VIDHYARAM Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)

by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mahendra Chawla Vs.

Union of India and ors. reported in 2019 (4) SCC 615, wherein

certain directions with respect to the witnesses protection scheme 2018

has been given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Petitioner has also

approached before the senior Police Authorities by way of filing

detailed applications, but the same has not been given effect to till date.

In such circumstances, he has prayed for following reliefs:-

"(1) That, since the petitioner and family members are the sufferer for the life of Balister Singh and are the witnesses and near relative therefore, the police authorities be directed to provided necessary police protection to save the life liberty and property of the petitioner and his family member from the threatening and undue interferene on the part of the accused.

(2) That, the police authorities may also be direted to ensure the petitioner and his family member about the safety, security of their life, liberty and property.

(3) That, the respondent authorities may also be directed to ensure strict compliance of the witness protection scheme 2018.

(4) That, the cost of the litigation may also be awarded.

(5) Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be granted to the petitioner.

Per contra, counsel for the State has opposed the arguments

made by the petitioner and has argued that as far as harassment and

protection to the petitioner is concerned it is submitted that the Witness

Protection Scheme, 2018 has been framed by the Home Ministry. The

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH WP-4428-2021 (VIDHYARAM Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)

petitioner has to apply as per the provision of Scheme, 2018 and file an

application to the competent authority in a prescribed format. The

matter can be taken up by the authorities for granting protection to the

petitioner who happens to be witnesses of the case, therefore, no the

reliefs can be extended to the petitioner at this stage in the petition. He

has prayed for dismissal of the petition.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

From perusal of the record it is seen that with respect to the

death of the brother of the petitioner and FIR was got registered at

Crime No.74/2020 for offences under Sections 323, 294, 506 and 34 of

IPC. Further added Section 302 of IPC.

As far as the relief claimed by the petitioner with respect to

granting protection to him as he is witness in the offence committed

under Section 302 of IPC is concerned, the Witness Protection Scheme,

2018 provides for filing of an application by the witness in the

prescribed format before the competent authorities for seeking witness

protection order. It can be moved by the witness or his family members

or duly engaged counsel or Investigating Officer or Station House

Officer or SDO(P)/Prison and SP concerned and the same shall

preferably be got forwarded through the Prosecutor concerned; The

Competent Authorities is defined as the Standing Committee in each

District chaired by District and Sessions Judge with Head of the Police

in the District as Member and Head of the Prosecution in the District as

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH WP-4428-2021 (VIDHYARAM Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)

its Member Secretary.

The offences for which such the offences is formulated is

provided under the definition Clause 2(i) which is read as under:

"Offence" means those offences which are punishable with death or life imprisonment or an imprisonment up to seven years and above and also offences punishable under Section 354, 354-A, 354-B, 354-C, 354-D and 509 of IPC."

The Procedure for processing the application is also

prescribed in Clause 6 which reads as under:-

"(a) As and when an application is received by the Member Secretary of the Competent Authority, in the prescribed form, it shall forthwith pass an order for calling for the Threat Analysis Report from the ACP/DSP in charge of the concerned Police Sub-Division.

(b) Depending upon the urgency in the matter owing to imminent threat, the Competent Authority can pass orders for interim protection of the witness or his family members during the pendency of the application.

(c) The Threat Analysis Report shall be prepared expeditiously while maintaining full confidentiality and it shall reach the Competent Authority within five working days of receipt of the order.

(d) The Threat Analysis Report shall categorize the threat perception and also include suggestive protection measures for providing adequate protection to the witness or his family.

(e) While processing the application for witness protection, the Competent Authority shall also interact preferably in person and if not possible through electronic means with the witness and/or his family members/employers or any other person deemed fit so as to ascertain the witness protection needs of the witness.

(f) All the hearings on Witness Protection Application shall be held in-camera by the Competent Authority while maintaining full confidentiality.

(g) An application shall be disposed of within five working days of receipt of Threat Analysis Report from the Police authorities.

(h) The Witness Protection Order passed by the Competent Authority shall be implemented by the Witness Protection Cell of the State/UT or the Trial Court, as the case may be. Overall responsibility of implementation of all witness protection orders passed y the Competent Authority shall lie on the Head of the

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH WP-4428-2021 (VIDHYARAM Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)

Police in the State/UT.

However the Witness Protection Order passed by the Competent Authority for change of identity and/or relocation shall be implemented by the Department of Home of the concerned State/UT.

(i) Upon passing of a Witness Protection Order, the witness Protection Cell Shall file a monthly follow-up report before the Competent Authority.

(j) In case, the Competent Authority finds that there is a need to revise the Witness Protection Order or an application is moved in this regard, and upon completion of trial, a fresh Threat Analysis Report shall be called from the ACP/DSP in charge of the concerned Police Sub-Division."

In the present case, the petitioner has not filed any application

and the petitioner has sought protection alleging himself from the

threatening given by the accused persons and their family members

pressurizing him to compromise into the matter out of fear of dire

consequences as the petitioner is one of the witnesses in the criminal

case registered for offence under Sections 302 of IPC regarding death

of his brother under the unnatural circumstances. The petitioner is

required to file an application to the concerning Authorities i.e. the

competent authorities as defined under Clause 2(c) of the Witness

Protection Scheme, 2018. The application on the prescribed format is

required to be submitted. As soon as the application will be filed, then,

the same will be processed by the competent authorities. In such

circumstances and looking to the Witness Protection Scheme 2018, no

relief regarding protection can be extended to the petitioner at this

stage. Petitioner is at liberty to prefer an application to the competent

authority claiming protection.

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH WP-4428-2021 (VIDHYARAM Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)

With the aforesaid observation, the petition is disposed off.

                                                   (Vishal Mishra)
LJ*/-                                                  Judge

        LOKENDRA
        JAIN
        2021.03.31
        16:21:35 -07'00'