JKL High Court Refuses Security To A Man Apprehending Harm Over Rumours Of Being 'BJP Agent'

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court recently declined intervention in a plea seeking a direction upon the government to provide security cover to the Petitioner as there are rumors in his locality that he is a 'BJP agent'.

A bench of Justice Vinod Chatterji Koul observed that the authorities had already made a threat assessment and did not find it necessary to provide him personal security.

The petitioner in person Mohd Ashfaq Hussain Handoo of Tanki Mohalla, Jamia Masjid Srinagar had approached the High Court with a plea that directions be issued to Jammu and Kashmir government to provide police protection to him and his brother Manzoor Ali Handoo during their staying in Srinagar "as per the situation and circumstances in Kashmir Valley."

In his plea, the petitioner submitted that he wanted to stay at the old city Srinagar Jamia Masjid after being out of Kashmir for the past thirty years and since he doesn't know his neighborhood well, there are likely chances that he would be harmed and in that case, he will not be able to recognize his assailant.

The petitioner further submitted that the said neighborhood was once the hub of terrorists and some of the ex-terrorists might be still active in the area.

Pleading for security before the bench the petitioner contended that since there are rumors about him being a BJP agent, there is every likelihood that the petitioner might be harmed.

Contesting the plea the Additional Advocate General  Ms. Asifa Padroo submitted that the security cover is given on the basis of threat assessment reports laid down in the "Yellow Book" of the Ministry of Home Affairs and the threat perception report is assessed by the CID wing of J&K police through field agencies and an individual facing threats is categorized in the security review coordination committee.

Ms. Asifa further stated that the case of the petitioner was forwarded to CID J&K on September 27, 2022, in response of which the CID said the threat quotient has been assessed to be 03 out of 10 which is low.

On the strength of the said CID report the counsel argued the threat assessment report (TAR) of December 2, 2022 reveals a low threat quotient to the petitioner and does not reveal any specific threat faced by the petitioner and hence the petitioner is not entitled to security cover and categorization.

After hearing both sides and perusing the CID report on the subject, the bench declined intervention in the matter and dismissed the petition.

Case Title : Yang Burz Home vs UT of J&K and Ors.

Counsel For Petitioner : Petitioner In Person.

Counsel For Respondent : Ms Asifa Padroo AAG

Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 262

Click Here To Read/Download Order