LAWS(KER)-2012-8-356

PRASANNA Vs. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

Decided On August 07, 2012
PRASANNA Appellant
V/S
SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner, who says that she, a music teacher, lives with her husband and two minor children, complains of harassment by the second respondent alleging that he, a senior citizen, is in the habit of consuming alcohol and then being in public; with objectionable conduct, using abusive language and otherwise publicly harassing the women folk. Petitioner also says that the second respondent is now living with a woman not connected to him in marriage. We do not take cognizance of that particular allegation. We are astonished to hear the Government version that in terms of Ext. P6, an earlier judgment by this Court, the police took it upon themselves to give continuous police cover to the second respondent by making a constable escort him always that, according to us was wholly unnecessary. Ext. P6 does not contain any such direction.

(2.) When the High Court issues an order to provide protection for life, that is not a direction to make available a police constable exclusively at the disposal of the person who is to be granted protection, unless so ordered, specifically. In the absence of any such specific direction, it is within the wisdom of the Station House Officer jurisdictional to have appropriate mechanism to have a watch on the person who is granted protection and to extend actual physical cover of protection through a civil police officer or officers when a particular situation warrants such cover. It would be absurd to think otherwise. It is not in national interest to spend money from the public exchequer for policemen to provide police cover, unless, of course, there is specific direction for a complete protective escort and cover, either by the Government, the jurisdictional police officer or the competent court.

(3.) For the aforesaid reasons, we are clear in our mind that the State Government may find out ways and means of requiring the second respondent to pay up any amount that may be due in terms of Government decisions requiring any payment for having provided the police cover until now.