LAWS(SC)-1996-10-87

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE DELHI Vs. REGISTRAR DELHI HIGH COURT NEW DELHI

Decided On October 11, 1996
COMMISSIONER OF POLICE,DELHI Appellant
V/S
REGISTRAR,DELHI HIGH COURT,NEW DELHI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The People of India, that is Bharat, gave to themselves a written Constitution effective from 26th January, 1950, ordaining in Article 74 that there shall be a council of ministers with the Prime Minister as the Head, to aid and advice the President. The importance of the office of the Prime Minister in a parliamentary democracy is well understood and needs no elaboration. In the course of time, on October 31, 1984, the People of India suffered assassination of their Prime Minister, Shrimati lndira Gandhi, during a period of great turmoil and tumult. Her son, Shri Rajiv Gandhi then stepped forward to serve the country as Prime Minister, when the cult of violence had begun and was expected to gain ground.

(2.) On December 2, 1989, Shri Rajiv Gandhi demitted the office of Prime Minister. On May 21, 1991, he was assassinated, whereafter need was felt to bring the former Prime Ministers of India and the immediate members of their families under the umbrella of the Act. Therefore a Bill passed by the Parliament brought forth the necessary amendment with effect from 25-9-1991, whereunder every former Prime Minister of India was brought at par with the existing Prime Minister of India for being extended high security. The following was the statement of objects and reasons made in the Parliament when introducing the amendment:

(3.) The Act is thus very special in nature, in as much as the Prime Minister of India and the members of his immediate family as well as former Prime Minister of India and the members of their immediate families form a distinct group which are under the protective cover of the Act; the only distinction being that the Prime Minister cannot shake off the protective cover but any member of his immediate family, a former Prime Minister or any member of his immediate family, can and may decline such protective cover, and in that case the obligation to provide security gets lifted.