After Atiq Ahmed episode, Allahabad High Court orders full security for Mukhtar Ansari; bars media from interviewing him

Weeks after gangster-turned-politician Atiq Ahmed and his brother Ashraf were shot dead, the Allahabad High Court recently directed the Uttar Pradesh Police to ensure 'full security' to former Member of Legislative Assembly (MLA) Mukhtar Ansari [Afshan Ansari v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others]..A Division Bench of Justices Kaushal Jayendra Thaker and Shiv Shankar Prasad asked the Director General of Police to ensure the safety of Ansari while shifting him from one jail to another and while producing him before any court from jail.The Court also prohibited the media from interviewing him."Full security shall be given to the husband of the petitioner while shifting him from one jail to another and while producing him before any Court from jail and on the way or any other place. Media person would not be permitted to interview him. He would be accompanied by the police personnel during his ingress and egress from jail. This order is being passed seeing the recent episode which occurred in the State of Uttar Pradesh, wherein in the garb of media persons some criminals had killed two under trial prisoners, who were in the custody of the Police Personnel, which matters are pending before the Apex Court. So as to ensure the safety of the accused this restriction is ordered," the order stated..The Court was hearing a plea moved by Ansari's wife seeking directions to the State of Uttar Pradesh to safeguard Ansari's protection, as he is apprehending a threat to his life in jail..In response to the plea, the State submitted that the jail authorities and the police are taking every precaution for security of Ansari in jail and while bringing him outside the jail to produce him before the trial court. It was also stated that whenever Ansari is taken out from jail, one Inspector, two Sub-Inspectors, 2 Head Constables, 8 Constables and 2 drivers form the security detail..While accepting the State's submissions, the Court requested the Director General of Police to ensure Ansari's safety."We also request the Director General of Police, U.P., respondent no. 3 to ensure the safety of the husband of the petitioner as he is apprehending threat to his life in the jail, where he is incarcerated," the Court observed.Even as it restricted media personnel from interviewing Ansari, the Court clarified that it is not against the same. However, considering the recent killing of Atiq Ahmed, such restriction would be in the interest of Ansari, it said..On April 15, Atiq Ahmed and his brother Ashraf Ahmed were shot dead at point-blank range on live television by three assailants posing as reporters.This incident occurred two days after Ahmed's son Asad and aide Gulam were killed in an encounter with the Uttar Pradesh Special Task Force (STF) in Jhansi..Ansari has been in jail for conviction in a whole host of offences committed over the years. Most recently, a Ghazipur Court convicted him in a kidnapping and murder case and sentenced him to 10 years' imprisonment with a fine of ₹5 lakh.In September last year, the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court had sentenced him to seven years' imprisonment for intimidating a jailer by abusing, pointing a pistol at him and threatening to kill him in 2003.Shortly after that, he was also sentenced to five years' rigorous imprisonment and a ₹50,000 fine under the Gangsters Act in relation to 1999 case in which he and his gang members committed heinous offences including murder, extortion, kidnapping and abduction.In its June 13, 2022 order, the High Court had stated that given his criminal antecedents, Ansari is a notorious criminal, who has an image of ‘Robin Hood’ in Northern India. "He is harden and habitual offender, who has been in sphere of crime since 1986, but he has managed not a single conviction against him. He has more than 56 cases to his credit of heinous nature and he could manage his affairs in such a way that he did not receive a single conviction barring of two which have been rendered recently," the Court had noted..[Read Order]