G.S.Jaisankar v. The State Of Tamil Nadu
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 10.02.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.CHANDRASEKHARAN G.S.Jaisankar ... Petitioner Vs.
1. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep by its Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009.
2. The Director General of Police (DGP), Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai, Santhome, Chennai.
3. The Superintendent of Police, Thirupattur District, Thirupattur - 635 601. ...Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to provide/depute a Personal Security Officer (PSO) with Armed immediately to the petitioner, the Founder and President of VIJAYA BHARATHA MAKKAL (PEOPLE) PARTY, Ambur registered as a Political Party vide F.No.56/147/2011/PPS-I/377 under Section 29A of Registration of the People Act, 1951 recognized by the Election Commission of India, in consequence of apprehension of threats, intimidation, duress, coercion and terrorization from the Islamic Terrorists or from its any quarters.
For Petitioner : Mr.L.K.Manjunath For Respondent : Mr.S.Santhosh Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
O R D E R
The Writ Petition has been filed to direct the respondents to provide/depute a Personal Security Officer (PSO) with Armed immediately to the petitioner, the Founder and President of VIJAYA BHARATHA MAKKAL (PEOPLE) PARTY, Ambur registered as a Political Party vide F.No.56/147/2011/PPS-I/377 under Section 29A of Registration of the People Act, 1951 recognized by the Election Commission of India, in consequence of apprehension of threats, intimidation, duress, coercion and terrorization from the Islamic Terrorists or from its any quarters.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner was provided Personal Security Officer (PSO) with Armed facility FROM 21.07.2013 to 13.12.2021. After change of Government, his security guard was withdrawn. Therefore, he gave a representation to the 2nd respondent/Director General of Police (DGP), Chennai vide letter dated 11.10.2022 in Doc.No.3296786/ Citizenship-2/2022-1 apprehending threat to his life from the accused in Auditor Ramesh murder case. Under such
circumstances, withdrawal of Personal Security Officer (PSO) with Armed facility is not appropriate, leading to filing of this petition.
3. In response, learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submitted that after withdrawal of Security Guard, no complaint was given by the petitioner apprehending danger. He further submitted that petitioner's representation dated 06.10.2022 was considered by taking into consideration of various aspects. Then, on the basis on the office memorandum of ADGP Intelligence Office Memo SCA.8. No.11980 -4/T, Personal Security Officer (PSO) with Armed facility was withdrawn. It is also further stated that petitioner's house is monitored by Police Patrol during day and night.
4. In the light of the submission made and the report submitted by the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side), this Court is of the view that, as of now, prayer made by the petitioner for Personal Security Officer (PSO) with Armed facility cannot be considered. As and when petitioner apprehends any real danger to his life, he may give representation to the respondent police seeking police protection. On receiving the representation, the respondents are directed to pass suitable orders.
5. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.
10.02.2023 Index :Yes/No Internet:Yes/No Sma To
1. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep by its Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009.
2. The Director General of Police (DGP), Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai, Santhome, Chennai.
3. The Superintendent of Police, Thirupattur District, Thirupattur - 635 601.
4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
G.CHANDRASEKHARAN, J.
Sma W.P. No.3715 of 2023 10.02.2023