Dr.B.Ramaswamy Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to reconsider/revise its decision vide the minutes of the Security Review

¶17

Page 1 of 6

¶18

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶19

W.P.No.2069 of 2024

¶20

Committee dated 20.03.2023 of the first respondent and consequently provide adequate police protection to the petitioner and his family members and property forthwith.

¶21

For Petitioner : Mr.Godroa Swaminath For Isaac Chambers

¶22

For Respondents : Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

¶23

ORDER

¶24

This writ petition has been filed seeking direction directing

¶25

the respondents to reconsider/revise its decision vide the minutes of the

¶26

Security Review Committee dated 20.03.2023 of the first respondent and consequently provide adequate police protection to the petitioner and his family members and property forthwith.

¶27

2 . It is seen that the petitioner is an Advocate practicing in

¶28

Hon'ble Supreme Court of India and various High Courts of the country. He used to come his native town viz., Sivagangai, Tamilnadu, on every Friday and return back to work. He is well known for his active participation in leading organizations and central political parties. In view of the political enmity, he had faced various threats and hence he apprehends the he may be attacked by the persons belonging to the

¶29

Page 2 of 6

¶30

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶31

W.P.No.2069 of 2024

¶32

opposite political parties, while he is in Tamil Nadu. Therefore, the petitioner filed petition in Crl.O.P.No.1691 of 2023 seeking adequate police protection and this Court by an order dated 02.02.2023 directed the Security Committee to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner in the light of earlier violent incidents that were committed against the petitioner. However, the Security Review Committee by its minutes dated 20.03.2023 decided not to provide security to the petitioner since no specific threat as against the petitioner.

¶33

3 . Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials placed before this Court.

¶34

4 . On perusal of records, it is revealed that this Court by an order dated 21.02.2025, directed the third respondent to provide police protection, if the petitioner visits Chennai. As directed by this Court, the petitioner is now provided with police protection whenever he visits to Tamil Nadu.

¶35

5 . Considering the above facts and circumstances, the interim

¶36

order shall continue and whenever the petitioner seeks police protection, Page 3 of 6

¶37

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶38

W.P.No.2069 of 2024

¶39

the third respondent is directed to consider the same and provide police protection till the petitioner departs from Tamil Nadu. In the mean while, the first respondent is directed to revise its decision of the Security Review Committee and pass fresh orders, on merits and in accordance with law.

¶40

6 . With the above directions, the Writ Petition stands disposed

¶41

of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶42

14.03.2025

¶43

Index : Yes/No Neutral citation : Yes/No Speaking/non-speaking order rts

¶44

Page 4 of 6

¶45

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis