CLCON/231/2021
2021 Latest Caselaw 2954 UK

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
                    AT NAINITAL
       ON THE 10TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2021
                          BEFORE:
 HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI
     CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 231 OF 2021
BETWEEN:
Ved Parkash Gupta                    ... Petitioner
     (By Mr. Parikshit Saini, Advocate)

AND:
Nitesh Kumar Jha & others            ... Opposite Parties
     (By Mr. Pradeep Hariya, Standing Counsel)

                        JUDGMENT

1. WPCRL No. 474 of 2017 was filed by the petitioner seeking protection to his life and liberty. Division Bench of this Court by an interim order dated 07.04.2017 directed Senior Superintendent of Police, Dehradun to provide protection to the petitioner.

2. The said writ petition was subsequently disposed of vide order dated 08.05.2017. Operative portion of the said order is extracted below:-

"In the circumstances, we dispose of the writ petition as follows:

i. Interim order is made absolute. ii. We direct that petitioner will be given effective protection for his life and personal liberty. With regard to the prayer that he must be given a gunner, we also permit him to move respondent no. 2 within a period of three days from today. If such request is made, respondent no. 2 will consider the same, both in accordance with law and also keeping in view serious allegations, which have been made by the petitioner. Needless to say there is a clear cut duty on the part of the respondent no. 2 to see that petitioner will remain protected in view of threats received by him."

3. In this contempt petition, petitioner has contended that a Gunner (Personal Security Officer) was provided to him pursuant to the interim order dated 07.04.2017, which facility has now been withdrawn, thus respondents have committed contempt of order of this Court.

4. A response affidavit has been filed by Mr. Yogender Singh Rawat, Senior Superintendent of Police, Dehradun in which it has been stated that threat perception to the petitioner was reviewed and it was found that petitioner does not need any police protection now, therefore, Personal Security Officer given to him was withdrawn. Para 7 of the said response affidavit is reproduced below:-

"7. That it is humbly submitted here that the Deputy Inspector General of Police (Security), Intelligence and Security, Uttarakhand vide letter no. S-07 (Shadow/9Gunner/2021(Dehradun)-1021 dated 01.05.2021 pursuant to the letter no. 727/XX- 2/21/01(12)/2021 T.C. dated 30.04.2021 issued by Government of Uttarakhand, issued direction to apprise regarding the present status of the petitioner and other persons to whom the gunners have been provided. In compliance whereof vide letter no. J.R./Bodyguard/2021 dated 02.05.2021 an information regarding the gunners has been provided to the Intelligence Head Quarter, Uttarakhand, wherein regarding the petitioner the following comment has been made.

After examining the life threat perception to the petitioner, it has been revealed that there is no direct or remote cause exists to the life of the petitioner. Moreover, in view of the direction passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in Special Leave Petition no. 25237/2010 (Abhay Singh Vs. State of U.P. and others), the providing of gunner facility is no nore recommended"

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that withdrawal of police protection is without any reason or justification and this is a clear case of contempt.

6. This Court is not impressed by the submission made on behalf of the petitioner. Perusal of the final order passed in WPCRL No. 474 of 2017 indicates that petitioner was granted liberty to approach the Competent Authority for grant of facility of Gunner (P.S.O.) to him. The said facility was not given to the petitioner for all times to come, but it was subject to periodical review of threat perception to the petitioner. Since the Authorities have now formed an opinion after considering relevant aspects that threat perception does not exist anymore, therefore, withdrawal of the facility of Gunner (P.S.O.) cannot be said to be in breach of direction issued by this Court.

7. In such view of the matter, the contempt petition is closed. Notices issued to the opposite parties are hereby discharged.

8. However, petitioner shall be at liberty to approach Senior Superintendent of Police, Dehradun for providing protection only for visiting District Court at Dehradun for attending proceedings in relation to Criminal Appeal No. 16 of 1998 and Special Session Trial No. 2 of 2017. If petitioner makes such application, the Senior Superintendent of Police, Dehradun shall consider grant of police protection only for the dates fixed in those criminal cases.

(MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI, J.) Aswal