Allahabad High Court
VINOD KANTversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The Court held that the petitioner must make a fresh representation before the Commissioner of Police with the intelligence report, and the decision on that representation will override the earlier order.
Summary
The petitioner, Vinod Kant, sought a writ of certiorari to quash an order dated 05‑09‑2025 that withdrew his personal Gunner Security, and a writ of mandamus to compel the State to restore the security. He alleged that the court had failed to consider an intelligence report dated 29‑10‑2022 submitted by the Local Intelligence Unit, Prayagraj. The respondents, the State of U.P. and others, contested the relief but could not dispute the omission of the report. The Court held that the petitioner must file a fresh representation before the Commissioner of Police, Prayagraj, attaching the said report, and that the decision on that representation shall supersede the impugned order. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed, with directions for fresh representation and a six‑week deadline for the respondent to decide.
Issues considered
- Whether the order withdrawing the petitioner’s personal Gunner Security can be quashed for not considering the intelligence report dated 29‑10‑2022.
- Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued directing the State to restore the personal Gunner Security.
Subjects
- writ of certiorari
- writ of mandamus
- Gunner Security
- personal security
- intelligence report
- fresh representation
- High Court of Allahabad
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 38117 of 2025
Vinod Kant
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Anurag Sharma
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 4
HON'BLE NEERAJ TIWARI, J.
HON'BLE SUDHANSHU CHAUHAN, J.
1. Heard Sri T.P. Singh, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Anurag
Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel
for State respondents.
2. The petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:-
"1. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari
quashing the impugned order dated 05.09.2025 passed by
respondent no.4 whereby continuance of petitioner's personal
Gunner Security has been withdrawn.
II. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus
directing the respondents to provide personal and restore the
Gunner Security which was provided earlier to the petitioner
for lifetime by the State at its expenses."
3. Grievance of the petitioner is that report dated 29.10.2022 submitted by
the Local Intelligence Unit, Prayagraj, morefully annexed as Annexure
No.3 to the writ petition, in respect of the subject matter in controversy
has not been considered while passing the impugned order dated
05.09.2025.
4. Learned Standing Counsel though opposed the prayer of the petitioner
but could not dispute the aforesaid fact from the record.
5. The writ petition is disposed with a direction to the petitioner to file
WRIC No. 38117 of 2025
2
fresh representation alongwith the report dated 29.10.2022 before the
respondent No.3-Commissioner of Police, Prayagraj, District Prayagraj.
In case such an application is filed, the respondent No.3 is directed to
decide the same in accordance with law within a period of six weeks.
6. It is made clear that the fresh order on representation shall override the
earlier impugned order.
(Sudhanshu Chauhan,J.) (Neeraj Tiwari,J.)
May 12, 2026
P.P.
Digitally signed by :-
POONAM PATEL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…