Cost Of Security Provided To Those Associated With Religious Orgs, Political Parties Or Entertainment Industry Must Be Recovered From Them: P&H High Court

The Punjab & Haryana High Court has sought Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) from both the states and UT Chandigarh regarding providing security to individuals against threat perception and also about charges payable against it.

While directing details required to be included in SOP, Justice Harkesh Manuja said, "If an individual is provided security due to their association with a political party, religious organization, or similar entity as well as persons associated with entertainment industry, SOP shall have consideration regarding cost being recoverable from said political party or religious organization and the subjective criteria for determining such political party/religious organization/ or other similar entities."

The development came after the Court had sought details from the Punjab DGP on security cover provided to VIPs and individual persons under the State Security Policy.

In pursuance of the Court's directions an affidavit was filed, however, the Court noted that "it nowhere mentions about any Rules/Regulations/Guidelines framed by the Govt. of Punjab as regards the charging of payment from the individuals who are being provided security by the State under threat perception."

Accordingly, it directed that the SOP at a bare minimum shall cover the following points regarding providing security to private individuals under threat perception:

Procedure related to assessment of threat perception and its scope and the procedure pursuant thereto according to the scope of threat perception. 

The procedure and parameters to determine an individual's liability for covering the costs incurred by the state in providing security including the points of consideration while determining the liability of the individual and the competent authority responsible for making such determination.

The Court also made clear that it, "is not averse to granting security to individuals free of cost or on part payment under compelling circumstances when the person cannot afford the same and the threat being expressed to him is real."

If the state considers extending security to individuals outside traditionally identified threatened categories, whether on a complimentary or partially subsidized basis, it is imperative that the eligibility criteria be clearly defined, it added.

The Court further noted that state police personnel are also involved in the security of individuals who are residents of other states or have lived in other states for a considerable period of time, this factor should also be addressed while framing the SOP.

Considering the fact that the issue in hand affects not only an individual but society at large covering the State of Haryana and UT, Chandigarh, the Court issued notes to both.

"Mr. Manish Bansal, learned PP for UT Administration, is also requested to produce “Yellow Book” titled “Security Arrangements for the Protection of Individuals” in a sealed cover on the next date of hearing," said the Court.

While listing the matter for May 16, the Court directed the counsel for the Punjab Government "to inform as to whether any Rules have been framed in exercise of powers under Section 80 of the Punjab Police Act, 2007."

Arjun Kapur, Advocate and V.P. Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Arjun Sheoran, DAG, Punjab

H.S. Oberoi, Advocate for the complainant.

Click here to read/download the order