Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2000 DIGILAW 961 (PNJ)

Kamaljit Singh v. State Of Punjab

2000-08-21

V.M.JAIN

body2000
Judgment V.M.Jain, J. 1. This order shall dispose of application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed by the petitioner for issuing necessary directions to the State to provide suitable mode of transportation to the petitioner and his family members for attending their functions and duties. In the petition, it was alleged that vide Court order dated 9.6.2000 it was directed that police protection shall be provided to the petitioner. It was alleged that in pursuance of the said order, the State has provided security to the petitioner and his family members. It was further alleged that petitioner and his family members, however, have become totally immobile, inasmuch as they were not allowed to travel by bus on account of security reasons and that the petitioner and his family members are unable to travel by car etc. It was also alleged that in this view of the matter, the petitioner has filed the present application for direction to the State to provide adequate mode of transportation to the petitioner and his family members as and when, they are required to move, so that they are not rendered immobile. 2. During the course of arguments, the learned counsel appearing for the State submitted before me that the prayer may be modified to the extent that no transportation may be provided to the petitioner and his family members for moving out, but transportation should be provided to the security-men who have been deputed to protect the life of the petitioner and his family members. 3. In written reply in the form of affidavit dated 8.8.2000 filed by Shri Surinder Pal Singh, S.P. Security, it was alleged that an armed guard of 1 Head Constable and four constables have been deployed at the residence of the petitioner while four security personnels have been deployed as gunmen on duty with the petitioner and his family members, in all 9 security personnel have been deployed for the security of the petitioner and his family members. Subsequently, in the reply by way of affidavit filed by Shri Surinder Pal Singh, S.P. Security dated 17.8.2000, it was alleged that one Head Constable and four constables were provided as residential guards and four security personnels were deployed with the petitioner and his family members with a view that two security personnels could accompany the petitioner and rest two will accompany the other family members of the petitioner whenever they move out. It was further alleged that two security personnels can easily accompany the petitioner in the bus. 4. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the record, in my opinion, no direction is required to be given to the State to provide transport to the security personnel provided to the petitioner. If the petitioner travels by his own vehicle, he can accommodate the two security personnel provided to him in the said vehicle. If the petitioner travels by transport like bus, security personnel provided to him can travel with him in the bus. In view of the above, the present application is dismissed.