Kolkata, Nov 12 The Calcutta High Court on Thursday reserved its order on TMC MP Abhishek Banerjee’s plea against security cover downgrade after a change of government in West Bengal, questioning the state over its failure to reassess threat perceptions despite alleged attacks on him and his family.
Hearing the petition, Justice Krishna Rao sought to know why the state had not convened a fresh security review committee meeting after Banerjee reported a series of incidents and sought enhancement of protection.
The court also questioned the state’s decision to downgrade his security cover on May 12 from Z-plus to X category shortly after the new government was instituted on May 9, and asked whether any provision prevented an interim review before the next scheduled six-monthly assessment.
Appearing for Banerjee, senior advocate Shoeb Alam alleged the downgrade was politically motivated and carried out at the behest of the ruling party.
“Abhishek Banerjee enjoyed Z+ security since 2013 based on threat assessment. But his protection was downgraded to the lowest category without any discussion or meeting of the authorised security review committee,” the counsel submitted.
Alam alleged that six attacks had taken place on Banerjee and his family since the downgrade of security, but repeated representations to the authorities had gone unanswered. He also claimed that the police pickets outside the MP’s residence and office had been withdrawn.
Banerjee’s advocate told the court that a JCB machine was deployed around 6.30 am on Thursday to demolish a police post outside Banerjee’s residence, describing it as an act of “maliciousness” by the state.
“There is a spate of violence after the new government came. There are statistics and news reports to show this. I don’t want a political assassination to take place,” Alam submitted.
The state, represented by Additional Advocate General Billwadal Bhattacharya, argued that security cover could not be claimed as a matter of right and that the police had not received any specific threat assessment for the Diamond Harbour MP warranting Z+ protection.
“A review of security cover took place on May 29 following the downgrade on May 12. These reviews are ordinarily conducted every six months,” the AAG said, adding that Banerjee’s next assessment was scheduled for the end of November.
He also contended that most MPs were provided X-category security and that Z+ protection involved substantial expenditure.
The court, however, repeatedly questioned why the authorities had not undertaken an interim review despite receiving representations detailing subsequent incidents. “You have received a request; these incidents have happened; is there any rule that you cannot hold the review committee (meeting) before six months?” Justice Rao asked.
It further observed that the authorities had not indicated whether the incidents cited by Banerjee were considered during the security assessment or why they were found insufficient to warrant enhanced protection.
The Additional Solicitor General, Dhiraj Trivedi, appearing for the Centre, submitted that Banerjee had been discharged from hospital without injuries after some of the alleged incidents.
The court questioned why that could be a reason for not undertaking a fresh threat assessment, stressing that the authorities were required to consider developments after the initial downgrade.
“Because of one publication, the writ petition should not be affected. I will take into account everything and pass orders,” it said as the state urged the court to initiate suo motu contempt proceedings against Banerjee for casting aspersions against a section of the judiciary.
Alam had argued that the abrupt reduction of protection, within days of the change in government, raised serious questions about the state’s motives and left Banerjee apprehensive about the safety of his family.
(PTI News)
