Mitali Palnitkar
Published On: January 12, 2022 at 16:28 IST
On January 12, 2022, a 5-member Committee chaired by former Supreme Court Judge Indu Malhotra was appointed by the Supreme Court. The Committee would be initiating an enquiry into the security breach due to which PM Modi’s convoy was stuck on a flyover in Punjab on January 5, 2022.
The Bench hearing the Case was led by Chief Justice of India N V Ramana. It also comprised of Justices Surya Kant and Hima Kohli.
The Committee appointed also comprises of the Registrar General of Punjab and Haryana High Court, the Additional Director-General of Police, Punjab, the Director General of Police, Chandigarh and the Director General of National Investigation Agency or his nominee (not below the rank of Inspector General).
Punjab Accused the Centre for the security breach and the Centre summoned the Punjab Police Officials asking for an explanation.
CJI NV Ramana stated, “We are of the considered opinion that the questions cannot be resolved through one-sided inquiries. A Judicial trained and independent mind duly assisted by officers well-acquainted with the security considerations and the Registrar General of the High Court, who has seized the records pursuant to our Orders, will be best suited to look into all the issues and submit a confidential report for the consideration of this Court.”
Justice Indu Malhotra Committee would be looking into the facts and will find out the causes for the breach, persons responsible for the lapse, necessary measures that need to be taken and recommendations to improve the Prime Minister’s Security.
The State of Punjab was represented by Advocate General DS Patwalia, who stated, “If I am guilty, please hang me and my officers, but give me a fair hearing.” He stated so as the Centre had issued Show Cause notices to its officers directing to take action against Punjab for the security breach.”
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta representing the Centre argued that there was a complete intelligence failure by the Punjab State. He claimed that the breach was violative of the Special Protection Group Act and the Blue Book.
Further, Mehta stated, “When there is complete breach, there is no question of hearing. Officers responsible are served with notice. There is an admitted fact of breakage. This is a rarest of rare case. It cannot brook any delay.”