Delhi High Court – Orders
Nilam Katara vs Union Of India & Ors on 20 November, 2020
$~7
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(CRL) 1834/2020
NILAM KATARA ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr P. K. Dey, Ms Shilpi Dey, Mr
Auditya and Ms Shreyasi
Chakrabarty, Advocates along with
petitioner
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr Gaurang Kanth, CGSC with Ms
Biji Rajesh and Mr Aman Singh
Bakshi, Advocates for R-1.
Mr Rajesh Mahajan, ASC (Criminal),
GNCTD with Ms Jyoti Babbar,
Advocate for R-4 & 5 with SI Rahul,
PS New Ashok Nagar.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU
ORDER
20.11.2020 [Hearing held through videoconferencing]
1. The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, praying that directions be issued to the respondents to provide the petitioner, round the clock, police protection by a central agency in Dehradun as well as in Delhi.
2. Mr Kanth, learned counsel appearing for respondent no.1 states that Delhi Police has already provided security to the petitioner and by a letter dated 19.11.2020, the Ministry of Home Affairs has also requested the State Signature Not Verified digitally signed by:DUSHYANT RAWAL Government of Uttarakhand to evaluate the threat perception and to provide the petitioner security in Dehradun.
3. The said letter also indicates that Delhi Police will provide a secured premise to the petitioner, whenever she visits Delhi, in connection with the cases pending before the courts.
4. Mr Dey, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner states that in addition to the prayers sought in the present petition, the petitioner would also require security while transiting from Dehradun to Delhi and such security can only be provided by a central agency because it would not be feasible for the petitioner to request to the Uttar Pradesh Government time and again to provide such security, as and when, the petitioner transits to the state of Uttar Pradesh. Mr Dey has also referred to an order dated 18.07.2017 passed by the Supreme Court in Iroma Chitra Devi v. UOI, wherein the Supreme Court had directed the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) to provide security to the petitioners in that case.
5. Mr Kanth, learned counsel appearing for respondent no.1 requests for some time to file an affidavit. He states that the petitioner’s threat perception would also be evaluated in the meantime. Let the counter affidavit be filed within a period of four weeks. Rejoinder, if any, be filed before the next date of hearing.
6. List on 18.01.2021.
VIBHU BAKHRU, J NOVEMBER 20, 2020 MK Signature Not Verified digitally signed by:DUSHYANT RAWAL