Harbhajan Singh's security not withdrawn abruptly after he left AAP: P&H High Court

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has ruled that the Punjab government did not withdraw cricketer and Member of Parliament (MP) Harbhajan Singh's security abruptly after he left the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) to join the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)..Justice Tribhuvan Dahiya noted that the decision to withdraw his security cover was taken following a due threat assessment by the Security Review Committee on March 3, which was much prior to his leaving the ruling party in Punjab."It cannot be said the petitioner’s security cover has been withdrawn abruptly due to his leaving the party. The decision to withdraw had been taken by the Review Committee much earlier, which is not denied," the Court said..Singh's security was withdrawn by Punjab Police soon after he, along with six other MPs of AAP joined the BJP in April. He then approached the High Court for restoration of his security, which comprised about 25 police personnel. In his petition, Singh alleged that following the withdrawal of his security, a protest was held by AAP workers outside his residence in Jalandhar. He added that the police remained a mute spectator while his house was "attacked by the mobsters."He further said the security was withdrawn in "a very vindictive manner" on the instructions of the local political regime of AAP without making any proper assessment of his threat perception. .On April 30, the Court directed Punjab police to ensure that no physical injury is caused to Singh or his family members while they are in the State of Punjab. The State government later told the Court that he has already been provided a ‘Y+’ category security cover by the Central government through the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF). It also submitted that since Singh was not continuously residing or operating within Punjab, his security arrangement was changed to a local deployment by the Commissioner of Police, Jalandhar..In the order passed on July 9, the Court said no further directions were needed since he has already been provided CRPF security and that the Punjab Police has also undertaken to take care of his security through local area deployment whenever he is in the State.With regard to the protests outside Singh's residence, the Court said they may not be sufficient to establish a threat to his life."The protests outside his residence or his being branded a traitor, would not establish threat to his life and liberty ipso facto. The protest was not violent either," it said..Advocates Harpreet S Multani, Harmanpreet S Mander, Ramaninder S Jagal, Kritika and Amardeep Singh represented Singh.Additional Advocate General Chanchal K Singla, Deputy Advocate General Vikas Arora with Advocates Medha Diwan and Kavita Joshi represented the State.Additional Solicitor General of India Satya Pal Jain with Senior Panel Counsel Saigeeta Srivastava appeared for the Union government..[Read Order]