Is there any remedy when the district level security committee has rejected my application for providing security?

I am a social worker and RTI activist. Since 2008 I have been active in seeking information pertaining to public importance. Many people have enmity because I have stopped their illegal business. They have threatened me to face dire consequences. Therefore, I have applied for security from the state government. The district level security committee has rejected my application. Is there any remedy when the district level security committee has rejected my application for providing security? Because I am still facing life threatening calls from these people. My advocate files an appeal before the division level committee but it is…

I am a social worker and RTI activist. Since 2008 I have been active in seeking information pertaining to public importance. Many people have enmity because I have stopped their illegal business. They have threatened me to face dire consequences. Therefore, I have applied for security from the state government. The district level security committee has rejected my application. Is there any remedy when the district level security committee has rejected my application for providing security? Because I am still facing life threatening calls from these people. My advocate files an appeal before the division level committee but it is also dismissed. I want to challenge it in the High Court. Can I get any relief?

You have no right to file an appeal against the decision of the District Level Security Committee. The decision becomes final and there is no provision to appeal against the said decision. Therefore, your appeal has correctly been dismissed by the Division Level Committee. 

You cannot get any relief from the High Court if you challenge the order of the Division Level Committee. In lack of provision to appeal there is no infirmity in the decision of the Division Level Committee.

In Akalu Ahir and others Vs. Ramdeo Ram [AIR 1973 SC 2145] Hon'ble the Supreme Court held that an appeal is a creature of statute and there is no inherent right of appeal. The same has been reiterated by the Hon’ble Supreme court in its umpteen judgments. 

Hence, you will get no fruitful relief from the High Court. Instead, you should prefer a writ petition before the High Court under Article 226 and seek direction to provide police protection at the expense of the state. Protection of life and personal liberty is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the constitution. 

In State of Uttar Pradesh v. Lalai Singh Yadav (1976) 4 SCC 213 the Supreme Court has held that the state is bound to secure the life of its citizens from threats and violence. Instead of challenging the decision of the Division Level Committee you should file a writ and demand security from the High Court.

Tags:

Shivendra Pratap Singh

Shivendra Pratap Singh

Advocate

Advocate Shivendra, practicing law since 2005, specializes in criminal and matrimonial cases, extensive litigatin experience before the High Court, Sessions court & Family Court. He established kanoonirai.com in 2014 to provide dependable and pragmatic legal support. Over the years, he has successfully assisted thousands of clients, making the platform a trusted resource for criminal and matrimonial dispute resolution in India.

Related Matters

Husband is demanding DNA test to check the paternity of our son in divorce case

The law does not permit a husband to compel his wife or child to undergo a DNA test merely on the basis of suspicion. In Gautam Kundu v. State of West Bengal (1993) 3 SCC 418, the Supreme Court held that a blood or DNA test cannot be directed as a matter of course. Before seeking such a direction, the husband must establish a strong prima facie case by proving that he had no access to his wife during the period when the child could have been conceived.

क्या चेक बाउंस का केस मियाद समाप्त होने के बाद भी दाखिल हो सकता है

Negotiable Instruments Act के अंतर्गत, वैधानिक अवधि समाप्त होने के बाद भी चेक बाउंस का मामला दायर किया जा सकता है। यदि शिकायतकर्ता देरी का उचित कारण प्रस्तुत करता है, तो न्यायालय विलंब को क्षमा कर शिकायत स्वीकार कर सकता है। नोटिस के बाद निर्धारित समय में भुगतान न होने पर कार्यवाही प्रारंभ की जा सकती है।

Cancellation of bail when accused tempering with witness

Seeking the cancellation of bail is possible when an accused person tampers with witnesses or influences a trial. This guide explains legal grounds for such actions, focusing on mandatory procedures under Section 15-A of the SC/ST Act and post-bail threats. Learn how victims can approach higher courts to ensure a fair trial and protect their rights.

Evidence of interested witness is admissible in criminal proceedings

In criminal law, the testimony of a related witness cannot be discarded solely due to their relationship with the victim. This legal overview clarifies the distinction between related and interested witnesses, citing key Supreme Court rulings. It explains how natural witnesses provide admissible evidence that reliably forms the basis for a conviction, even without independent corroboration.

SDM cannot attach property under section 146 crpc when civil suit is pending

A Sub-Divisional Magistrate cannot legally attach property under Section 146 of the CrPC if a civil suit regarding the same property is already pending. This guide explains why such orders lack jurisdiction and outlines the proper legal remedy, including filing a petition under Section 482 CrPC to the High Court based on established Supreme Court precedents.