The Bombay High Court on Thursday dismissed a public interest litigation (PIl) challenging the ‘Z’ category CRPF security cover given to Reliance Industries limited chairman Mukesh Ambani, after holding that the Centre had “executive powers” to provide protection to a private person or entity.
“There is nothing in the CRPF Act or rules that take away the executive powers of the Central Government to provide protection to a private person or entity. It is up to the authority to scrutinise and decide on demand for protection,” a HC bench of Chief Justice Mohit Shah and Justice MS Sancklecha noted.
Dismissing a PIl filed by two social activists Nitin Deshpande and Vikrant Karnik seeking quashing of the Centre’ April 21 order that provided CRPF security to Ambani, Chief Justice Shah said: “CRPF may be deployed anywhere in India not only for restoration of law and order but also for any other purpose as decided by the Centre,”.
Ambani, who has been provided “Z” security cover by the Centre in the wake of a reported threat to him from banned terror outfit Indian Mujahideen (IM), is being guarded by 25 Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) commandos and personnel with sophisticated weapons. He is escorted by pilot and follow-on vehicles.
Relying on a 1955 verdict of the Supreme Court that held that the Centre could take executive decisions and need not wait for the Parliament to enact or amend the law, the HC bench observed: “The executive powers of the central government are co-existent with the legislative power of the Parliament”.
Noting that the CRPF could be deployed for protection and prevention of crime, Chief Justice Shah said: “CRPF may be deployed anywhere in India not only for restoration of law and order but also for any other purpose as decided by the Centre”.Making a case for the withdrawal of the CRPF security cover given to the business tycoon, the petitioners’ lawyer Ashish Mehta argued that in 2009, the CISF Act was amended so that the Government could provide protection to private installations like oil refineries.“Similarly, if CRPF commandos are deployed for protection of private persons, then even the CRPF Act and rules should be amended,” Mehta said.
Intervening at this juncture, Chief Justice Shah asked the petitioners’ lawyer: “If you do not have objection to CISF providing protection to oil refineries then why are you raising objection to protection given to the person who put these oil refineriesIJ”Upbraiding the petitioners indirectly, the HC bench observed that it would not like to entertain PIls aimed at deriving publicity and wanted the petitioners “specify” some illegality and injustice in the government order providing CRPF security cover to Ambani.
The Centre had sanctioned security cover for Ambani after his office informed the Mumbai police about threatening letters purportedly sent by IM.
On his part, Additional Solicitor General Kevic Setalvad told the court that Ambani, who was being provided 25 CRPF commandos, was paying around Rs 15 lakh every month towards the security cover given to him.The PIl had among other things stated that CRPF had been constituted to tackle emergency situations and not for day-to-day law and order duties.“The service of the CRPF is required only when there arises situation of national emergency, terrorist attacks, internal disturbances, riots or otherwise which is beyond the control of the local police…. Such security is given only to high-risk individuals including Cabinet ministers, chief ministers, Supreme Court and High Court judges, leading politicians and senior bureaucrats,” the PIl stated.