Sanjay Mishra v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3078 of 2013 ======================================================

1. Sanjay Mishra S/O Sri Rashbihari Mishra R/O Village+ P.O- Yogia, P.SBrahmpur, District- Buxar. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar Through The Chief Secretary Government Of Bihar, Patna.

2. The District Magistrate, Buxar.

3. The Superintendent Of Police, Buxar.

4. Dy. Superintendent Of Police, Dumraon, Buxar.

5. The Inspector General Of Police, Patna Region, Patna.

6. The Deputy Inspector General Of Police, Dihari Region, Dihari.

7. The Police Inspector, Brahmpur, Buxar.

8. The Officer- In Charge,P.S- Brahampur, District- Buxar.

9. The District Security Committee Buxar.

.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Radha Mohan Pathak, Advocate. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Roy Shivaji Nath, Advocate. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ORAL ORDER 14-01-2016 Heard Mr. Pathak for the petitioner and the counsel for the State. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent no.3.

Petitioner is aggrieved by withdrawal of the security provided to him in the year 2008 which continued up to 2011. It is stated that the petitioner was instrumental in getting several notorious criminal(s) apprehended. He was awarded a medal. Subsequently, he was provided a Personal Security Officer which has now been withdrawn arbitrarily.

Patna High Court CWJC No.3078 of 2013 (4) dt.14-01-2016 2/2 In the counter affidavit, the respondents have stated that District Security Committee headed by the District Magistrate appraised the threat perception of the petitioner and in the light of the resolution of the District Security Committee held on 18th of November, 2011, the security provided to the petitioner was withdrawn. The petitioner was not found entitled to. One of the contentions of the petitioner is that in the year 2013, the respondents have suspended the arms license of the petitioner. This gives him a fresh occasion to approach the respondents for deployment of Security Officer to him. Considering the aforesaid, the writ application is disposed of permitting the petitioner to approach the respondents afresh for providing him the security in the light of the said fact. If any such application is filed, I am sure, the respondents would consider the same expeditiously in accordance with law. Be it noted that I have not expressed any view on such claim of the petitioner. (Kishore Kumar Mandal, J) Shyam/- U