Chandan Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4528 of 2017 ======================================================

1. Chandan Kumar Singh, Son of Ramadhar Singh, resident of village - Bara, Police Station Rani Talab, District - Patna .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through Chief Secretary, Home Department, Government of Bihar, Patna

2. The Director General of Police, Government of Bihar, Patna

3. The Additional Director General ( Head Quarter ), Bihar, Patna

4. The Inspector General, Central Range, Patna

5. The Deputy Inspector General Central Range, Patna

6. The District Magistrate, Patna

7. The Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna

8. The City Superintendant of Police, Muzaffarpur

9. The Station House officer, Kankarbagh Police Station, Patna

10. The Station House Officer, Kazi Muhammadpur Police Station, Muzaffarpur

11. The Station House Officer, Rani Talab Police Station, District Patna

12. The Inspector General (Security), State Security Committee, Bihar, Patna .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. B.P. Pandey, Sr. Advocate Mr. Shivendra Kumar Sinha For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sheo Shankar Pd.-Sc8 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 12-05-2017 Heard learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and A.C. to S.C. 8 for the respondents.

The present writ application has been filed for issuance of a direction to the respondents to provide security to the petitioner, as he is facing constant life threat, since he is a

2/4 contractor in C.P.W.D. In the alternative, the prayer has been made to restore his security which was earlier granted to the petitioner but subsequently withdrawn vide letter no. 1829 dated 22.2.2017 issued under the signature of Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna, as contained in Annexure 11 and further to direct the District Security Committee to provide him adequate security.

Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a Contractor in CPWD and is facing constant threat of life. Earlier the petitioner was provided security without realizing any cost though subsequently the cost of the same was realized, but on 22.2.2017 the security was withdrawn vide memo no. 1829 dated 22.2.2017, on the ground that the police headquarter has the authority to provide security for a period of one month only, hence for providing security on continuous basis the District Security Committee will take final decision. Consequently, an order was issued vide letter no. 2030 dated 24.2.2017, under the signature of Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna, as contained in Annexure 12, to the effect that the police force has to be deputed during

3/4 Panchayat Elections, hence, bodyguards have been directed to be withdrawn and the petitioner was directed to ask his bodyguard to report on 26.2.2017 at New Police Line, Patna. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that he has the information that the Government has now abolished the District Security Committee and now, the State Security Committee has been constituted. Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to implead the State Security Committee as respondent no. 12.

In the circumstances, the learned counsel for the petitioner confines his prayer that the petitioner may be permitted to file representation before the State Security Committee to consider the claim of the petitioner and dispose of the representation within a stipulated time. Learned counsel for the State does not raise any objection to such prayer. Accordingly, this writ application is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to file appropriate representation before the Inspector General (Security), State Security Committee, Bihar, Patna (respondent no. 12) within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt/production of a

4/4 copy of this order.

It is expected from respondent no. 12 to decide the claim of the petitioner within a period of six weeks from the date of filing such representation, in view of the fact that he was earlier granted security on the perception of threat to his life.

(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J) Anil/- U