Manipur High Court
Md. Nasiruddin Khan vs The State Of Manipur Represented ... on 2 November, 2022
1
SHAMUR Digitally
by
signed
AILATPA SHAMURAILATP
AM SUSHIL
M SUSHIL SHARMA
Date: 2022.11.04 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
SHARMA 15:04:41 +05'30' AT IMPHAL
WP(C)No. 814 of 2022
Md. Nasiruddin Khan, aged about 40 years old, S/o (L) Md.
Alauddin Khan, a permanent residence of Kiyamgei Muslim Awang
Leikai, PO Canchipur & PS Irilbung, Imphal East District, Manipur-
795003.
....... Petitioner
- Versus -
1. The State of Manipur represented by the Chief Secretary,
Government of Manipur, Manipur Secretariat, PO & PS Imphal,
Imphal West, Manipur-795001.
2. The State of Manipur represented by the
Commissioner/Principal Secretary/Special Secretary(Home),
Government of Manipur, Manipur Secretariat, PO & PS Imphal,
Imphal West, Manipur-795001.
3. The Director General of Police, Manipur, Police Headquarter,
PO & PS, Imphal, Imphal West, Manipur-795001.
WP(C) No. 814 of 2022 Page 1
2
4. The Superintendent of Police, Imphal East, PO & PS
Porompat, Imphal East, Manipur-795005.
5. The Officer-in-Charge, Irilbung Police Station, PO & PS
Irilbung, Imphal East District, Manipur-795149
.... Respondents
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.V. MURALIDARAN
For the Petitioner : Mr. HS Paonam, Sr.Adv.
For the Respondents : Mr. S. Niranjan, GA
Date of Reserved : 29.09.2022
Date of order : 02.11.2022
JUDGMENT & ORDER
(CAV)
[1] This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner to issue a writ of
mandamus directing the respondents to reconsider and review the impugned
order dated 5.8.2022 so that in-house security escort can be provided to the
petitioner in view of the continuous threat perception to the life of the petitioner
and his family.
WP(C) No. 814 of 2022 Page 2
[2] Heard Mr. H. S Paonam, learned senior counsel for the petitioner
and Mr. Niranjan, the learned Government Advocate for the respondents.
[3] The case of the petitioner is that he was a candidate of National
People's Party of 6-Keirao Assembly Constituency in the 12th Manipur
Legislative Assembly Election 2022. The petitioner often received several
threat from different banned organisations and he requested the Chief
Secretary, Director General of Police, Superintendent of Police, Imphal East
and Officer-in-Charge of Irilbung Police Station to provide well trained and
physically fit security personnel on 2.6.2022. Since the said authorities have
not taken any steps, he filed a writ petition in WP (C) No.446 of 2022 for
considering his grievance. By the order dated 17.6.2022, this Court directed
the Director General of Police, Manipur to consider the representation of the
petitioner dated 2.6.2022 and pass orders within a period of one month from
the date of receipt of copy of the order. This Court also observed that at the
time of considering the representation, the DGP shall take into consideration
the threat perception to the petitioner as reflected in the document at Annexure-
1 to the writ petition. Pursuant to the order dated 17.6.2022 passed in the said
writ, the DGP passed the impugned order, wherein at paragraph 5, the DGP
stated that the Superintendent of Police, Imphal East District to provide security
WP(C) No. 814 of 2022 Page 3
coverage to the petitioner by way of police mobile patrol till further orders.
Therefore, appropriate orders may be issued for providing full security escort to
protect the life of the petitioner and his family by reconsidering and reviewing
the order dated 5.8.2022.
[4] Mr. H.S Paonam, learned senior counsel for the petitioner
submitted that the third respondent issued the impugned order stating that there
is no specific threat of life on the petitioner on one hand and on the other hand,
signal of the Police Head Quarter has indicated threat perception to the
petitioner requiring security coverage and on that ground, the impugned order
needs to be reconsidered and reviewed by appreciating the actual attending
facts and circumstances of the threat perception of the petitioner.
[5] The learned senior counsel further submitted that the impugned
order has been passed without considering the actual threat perception to the
petitioner and since the petitioner repeatedly receiving threat to his life and his
family, detailing of security for the petitioner and his family would be highly
necessary for avoiding unwanted incidents disturbing the vested right of the
petitioner. Therefore, an appropriate order may be passed for detailing one
police mobile patrol at the gate of the petitioner 24x7 and that if the petitioner
and his family are not fairly protected, the fundamental rights of the petitioner
WP(C) No. 814 of 2022 Page 4
will be violated and the same would cause serious disturbance of law and order
in the State. Thus, a prayer is made to allow the writ petition, thereby reviewing
and reconsidering the impugned order dated 5.8.2022 and provide in-house
security escort to the petitioner and his family.
[6] Per contra, Mr. S. Niranjan, the learned Government Advocate
appearing for the respondents submitted that pursuant to the order of this Court
dated 17.6.2022 passed in WP (C) No.446 of 2022, the DGP considered the
representation of the petitioner and, accordingly, passed an order to the effect
that the existing security arrangement will continue till further orders and the
same shall be reviewed time to time and deployment shall be made accordingly.
[7] Placing on record the letter of the Superintendent of Police/CID
(SB), Manipur, Imphal addressed to the Inspector General of Police (Ops),
Manipur, the learned Government Advocate submitted that a detailed
assessment of threat perception in respect of the petitioner was conducted and
the assessment reveal that there is no report of any specific threat to the
petitioner. Therefore, there is no necessity to review and reconsider the order
dated 5.8.2022 passed by the DGP. Thus, a prayer is made to dismiss the writ
petition.
WP(C) No. 814 of 2022 Page 5
[8] This Court considered the rival submissions and also perused the
materials available on record.
[9] The grievance of the petitioner is that in view of admissible threat
perception of the life of the petitioner as stated in paragraph 5 of the order dated
5.8.2022 of the DGP, appropriate direction may be issued for providing full
security escort to the petitioner to protect his life and his family.
[10] Admittedly, the order dated 5.8.2022 was passed pursuant to the
direction of this Court dated 17.6.2022 passed in W.P.(C) No.446 of 2022,
wherein the petitioner sought for well trained and physically fit security
personnel in his residence. When the said writ petition was taken up for hearing
on 17.6.2022, the learned senior counsel for the petitioner submitted that he
will be satisfied for the time being if the writ petition is disposed of by issuing an
innocuous order to the DGP, Manipur to consider the representation dated
2.6.2022 submitted by the petitioner and dispose of the same by issuing a
speaking order within a stipulated period. The learned Government Advocate
also agreed that the DGP, Manipur has not objection in considering the
representation of the petitioner dated 2.6.2022. Recording the submission
made by both sides, this Court passed the following direction:
WP(C) No. 814 of 2022 Page 6
"In view of the submission made above, the present writ petition is
disposed of by directing the DGP, Manipur to consider the said
representation dated 02.06.2022 submitted by the petitioner and to
dispose of the same by issuing a speaking order within a period of one
month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is also made
clear that at the time of considering the said representation, the DGP,
Manipur shall take into consideration the threat perception to the
petitioner as reflected in the documents at Annexure-A1 (Colly.) to the
present writ petition."
[11] On 5.8.2022, the DGP, Manipur passed the following order:
"No.A-6/11/22-IGP(Ops)/2565 Whereas, Mohd. Nasiruddin Khan,
former Intending Candidate, 6-Keirao A/C has submitted a
representation along with enclosures to the Director General of Police,
Manipur dated 02.06.2022 for providing armed escort cum guards.
2. And whereas, the Hon'be High Court of Manipur has directed, in
particular, the Director General of Police, Manipur vide judgment order
dated 17/06/2022 (passed in case W.P.(C) No.446 of 2022, Mohd.
Nasiruddin Khan -vs- State of Manipur and Ors) to consider the
representation and dispose within 1 month from the date of receipt of
the order.
3. And whereas, the undersigned has also examined in detail the
representation of the petitioner and considered it appropriate to assess
the present threat perception of the petitioner. Accordingly, a threat
assessment report was called from SP/CID (SB).
WP(C) No. 814 of 2022 Page 7
4. And whereas, the SP/CID9SB) has submitted his present threat
assessment of the petitioner and reported, there is no report of specific
threat on his life.
5. And whereas, PHQ vide signal of even number dated 04.07.2022
has asked Superintendent of Police, ImphalEast District to provide
security coverage to Mohd. Nasiruddin Khan, former Intending
Candidate, 6-Keirao A/C by way of police mobile patrol till further
orders.
6. Now therefore, it is the considered opinion of the undersigned that
the existing security arrangement will continue till further orders. The
security arrangement shall be reviewed time to time, and deployment
shall be made accordingly.
With this, the representation dated 02.06.202 is disposed of."
[12] Highlighting paragraph 5 of the order dated 5.8.2022, the learned
counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Police Head Quarter has indicated
threat perception to the petitioner thereby requiring security coverage to the
petitioner. Despite the above report, full security escort to the petitioner has not
been provided.
WP(C) No. 814 of 2022 Page 8
[13] In the Annexure to the letter of the Superintendent of Police/CID
(SB), Manipur, Imphal addressed to the Inspector General of Police (Ops),
Manipur Imphal, it has been stated as under:
"Mohd. Nasiruddin Khan s/o (L) Md. Allaoddin Khan of Kiyamgei
Muslim AwangLeikai contested in the General Assembly Elections,
2022 from 6-Keirao A/C as NPP Candidate.
It is reported that in October 2021, UNLF imposed monetary demand
of Rs.10/- lakh and PREPAK demanded Rs.5/- lakh from him.
In the intervening night of 8th and 9th December, 2021, one hand
grenade with a threatening letter suspected to have been planted by
PREPAK was found lying at his main gate. Ref.: Irilbung PS case FIR
No.80(12)2021 u/s.307/34 IPC & r Expl. Subs. Act. Calls and
messages from mobile phone No.9362279877 and 9394259959 were
reportedly received on his mobile phone demanding monetary
assistance from PREPAK and UNLF respectively.
Currently, there is no report of any specific threat to Mohd. Nasiruddin
Khan, however, in view of the above, general threat to Mohd.
Nasiruddin Khan cannot be ruled out."
[14] When the report of the Police Head Quarter is to the effect that
general threat to the petitioner cannot be ruled out and when the observation
of the DGP, Manipur in the order dated 5.8.2022 is to the effect that PHQ asked
the Superintendent of Police to provide security coverage to the petitioner and
also in view of the plea of the petitioner that he received continuous threat
WP(C) No. 814 of 2022 Page 9
perception to his life, it would be appropriate to reconsider and review the order
dated 5.8.2022 passed by the DGP, Manipur for providing in-house security
escort to the petitioner and also for detailing one police mobile patrol at the gate
of the petitioner's house 24x7.
[15] The security should be provided only to those who face real threat
to life for having done some work in the interest of the society or the nation from
terrorist/naxalite or organized gangs and not otherwise. A personal enmity with
others would not come within the parameters for assessing the threat perception
of the applicant for providing him security. In the instant case, as stated supra,
the Police Head Quarter has indicated threat perception to the petitioner requiring
security coverage.
[16] As a matter of principle, private individual should not be given
security at the State's costs unless there are compelling transparent reasons,
which warrant protection, especially if the threat is linked to some public or
national service he has rendered and security should be granted to such
individual until the threat abates. But, if the threat perception is not real, it would
not be proper for the Government to grant security at the cost of tax-payers money
and to create privileged class.
WP(C) No. 814 of 2022 Page 10
[17] In the instant case, the petitioner is an Ex-candidate of 12th
Legislative Assembly 2022 from 6-Keirao Assembly Constituency and also
narrated the threats he received through SMS and other disturbing phone calls
from his companion and sources. Therefore, finding merit in the contention of
the petitioner, it would be appropriate to direct the DGP, Manipur to reconsider
and review the impugned order dated 5.8.2022 and pass necessary orders for
providing in-house security escort to the petitioner and the costs towards security
shall be fixed at the discretion of the DGP, Manipur, for which, the DGP, Manipur
shall pass necessary orders.
[18] In the result,
(1) The writ petition is allowed.
(2) The third respondent - DGP, Manipur shall
reconsider and review the order dated 5.8.2022
and pass orders providing in-house security escort
to the petitioner in view of the continuous threat
perception to the life of the petitioner and his
family.
(3) The costs towards the security given to the
petitioner is at the discretion of the DGP, Manipur
WP(C) No. 814 of 2022 Page 11
and the DGP, Manipur shall pass appropriate
orders in that regard.
(4) The said exercise is directed to be completed
within a period of four weeks from the date of
receipt of a copy of this order.
(5) No costs.
JUDGE
FR/NFR
John Kom
WP(C) No. 814 of 2022 Page 12
