Sakina Tashrifwala
Published on: October 31, 2022 at 19:03 IST
The Delhi High Court ordered the Central Government to file a “more comprehensive affidavit” to ensure the court that security concerns made by former Rajya Sabha MP Subramanian Swamy over his private residence in the national capital “would be adequately addressed.”
The Centre notified Justice Yashwant Varma that an affidavit of compliance had been filed stating that a joint security review of Swamy’s private property had been completed and that the whole security setup will shift when Swamy moves to his private residence.
However, Swamy’s counsel stated that, notwithstanding the assurance granted to the court on September 14, the Centre has not supplied adequate infrastructure to assure his private residence’s protection.
On this, the Centre’s counsel stated, “…what we do is, if space is available, facilities are created at private residence; if there is no space, we post six guards and rotate them so that even if they don’t have a permanent setup, they are rotated. In many cases, in private houses, it is not possible to provide all of this. This can be done in bungalows but not in a private colony.”
However, Justice Varma stated verbally, “It can’t be done concurrently with his move…”
In this regard, the union government counsel argued that security guards should be cycled in circumstances where it is not practicable to install guardrooms in private colonies to ensure that security employees have adequate rest.
“We are unable to provide security to every private individual,” the counsel continued.
“He is not every private individual. He is an individual whom you [have] assigned Z category [protection]. What we have not been able to grasp is how you would rotate, where will they (guards) stand, where will they sit?…Place it on affidavit,” Justice Varma added.
The court ordered the Centre to provide a more thorough affidavit and scheduled the case for hearing on November 3.
The court was considering Swamy’s petition, in which he claimed that the central government had failed to maintain security precautions at his private residence, despite his assurance to the court that he would do so when he handed over custody of his government residence to the authorities.
Swamy was represented by Senior Advocate Jayant Mehta, who was supported by Advocate Sathya Sabharwal.
Background
Swamy, who has been granted Z category protection by the Centre, was assigned government housing on January 15, 2016 for a five-year tenure. A home in Lutyens Delhi had been assigned to him due to a threat assumption.
Swamy was then elected to the Rajya Sabha, whose term ended on April 24 this year.
While Swamy was a member of the upper house, the government accommodation remained with him long after the allotment expired due to the passage of time.
After his term as Rajya Sabha MP expired, he was recently requested to quit the premises.
Swamy subsequently petitioned the High Court, stating that, given the security arrangements that must be made for a Z category protectee, the accommodation that was originally assigned to him must be maintained in his favour.
Previous Petition
On September 14, Justice Varma dismissed Swamy’s petition, stating that while the original allotment was granted for a term of five years, which has now expired, no material was shown by Swamy that may mandate and necessitate the allotment of government accommodation to a Z class protectee.
On the other hand, Additional Solicitor General Sanjay Jain, standing for the Centre, stated that Swamy has his own residence premises to which he can relocate, and that security services must take all necessary precautions in the aforementioned premises to ensure Swamy’s safety and security.
As a result, the court stated that all that remained for the authorities to do would be to ensure that suitable provisions are made at Swamy’s private property to assure his security.