Dismissed

Dhani Ram Baruah and Anr. v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Gauhati HC7 Sept 2022I.A.(Civil)/353/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court dismissed an interlocutory application seeking restoration of a second PSO for the petitioner. The Court held that the Expert Committee's threat assessment is not arbitrary and refused to direct additional security absent procedural flaw in the Committee's decision.

What did the court decide?

The application was dismissed. No direction for restoration of the second PSO was granted.

Dhani Ram Baruah and Anr. Vs the State… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010017562021

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/353/2021

¶5

DHANI RAM BARUAH AND ANR.

¶6

CHAIRMAN OF DR. DHANI RAM BARUAH HEART INSTITUTE AND RESEARCH CENTER (HEART CITY), R/O. SONAPUR, DIST. KAMRUP, ASSAM

¶7

2: MISS DALIMI BARUAH D/O VIBHAK BARUAH VILL. KAMALAJARI P.O.KAMALAJARI P.S.SONAPUR KAMRU

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS. REP. BY THE CHIEF SECY.TO THE GOVT.OF ASSAM ,DISPUR, GHY-6

¶10

2:COMMISSIONER AND SECY. TO THE GOVT.OF ASSAM

¶11

HOME DEPTT DISPUR GHY-6

¶12

3:DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE

¶13

ULUBARI GHY-7

¶14

4:OFFICER IN CHARGE

¶15

SONAPUR POLICE STATION SONAPUR

¶16

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR P BHARDWAJ

¶17

Page No.# 2/4

¶18

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM

¶19

Linked Case : WP(C)/5897/2009

¶20

DR. DHANI RAM BARUAH and ANR. CHAIRMAN OF DR. DHANI RAM BARUAH HEART INSTITUTE AND RESEARCH CENTER HEART CITY R/O SONAPUR IN THE DIST OF KAMRUP ASSAM

¶21

2: MISS DALIMI BARUAH D/O VIBHAK BARUAH VILL. KAMALAJARI P.O.KAMALAJARI P.S.SONAPUR KAMRUP VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS REP. BY THE CHIEF SECY.TO THE GOVT.OF ASSAM DISPUR GHY-6

¶22

2:COMMISSIONER AND SECY. TO THE GOVT.OF ASSAM

¶23

HOME DEPTT DISPUR GHY-6 3:DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE

¶24

ULUBARI GHY-7 4:OFFICER IN CHARGE SONAPUR POLICE STATION SONAPUR. -----------Advocate for : MR.N BARUA Advocate for : MR.B N SARMA appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS

¶25

Page No.# 3/4

¶26

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA

¶27

ORDER

¶28

Date : 07-09-2022

¶29

Heard Mr. P. Bharadwaj, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. B. Deuri, learned counsel for the respondents.

¶30

By this interlocutory application, the applicant who is a doctor by profession seeks for a direction that two PSOs which were provided to him be restored back, although as per a decision of the Expert Committee dated 10.11.2020, a view had been formed that threat perception of the applicant has been reduced and therefore, the authorities are of the view that one PSO would be adequate for the purpose.

¶31

In an application under the writ jurisdiction, we are unable to take a view different from the Expert Committee as because it is the prerogative of the Expert Committee to make a threat assessment as regards the citizens depending on the facts and circumstances of every case, unless such assessment is made in an arbitrary manner or without following any required procedure. No material indicating any arbitrary decision being taken by the Expert Committee, nor any aberration of the procedural requirement by the Expert Committee, has been brought before the Court. From such point of view, we are unable to agree to the prayer of the applicant to restore the second PSO which was withdrawn but however, if the applicant is seriously of the view that there is a higher threat perception to the applicant than what had been decided by the Expert Committee, the applicant would be at liberty to make any application, as per law and if made, the Expert Committee would consider the same and pass a reasoned order.

¶32

Page No.# 4/4

¶33

We are clarifying that by requiring the Expert Committee to consider the case upon a representation made is not a direction from the Court to make available an additional PSO to the applicant, but to make a proper assessment of the threat perception regarding the applicant as per the materials available.

¶34

I.A. stands closed.

¶35

JUDGE

¶36

Comparing Assistant

Dhani Ram Baruah and Anr. v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhani Ram Baruah and Anr. v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jericho Detergent Pvt. Limited and Anr. Vs the Union of India and 5 Ors.

Sunita Agarwal Vs the Securities and Exchange Board of India and Anr.

Nirmala Didwania Vs the Securities and Exchange Board of India and Anr.

Bidut Bakshi @ Bidyut Bakshi Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

The Union of India and 4 Ors. Vs Subodh Kumar Singh

Manju Taye Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.