The Punjab and Haryana High Court has issued a summons to Chandigarh’s SSP (Security & Traffic), Sumer Pratap Singh, demanding an explanation next week for the contradictory statements made about the threat level to a High Court judge. This directive arises from a suo motu case initiated to assess the judge’s security following an incident in September 2024, where a personal security officer’s firearm was snatched and used in a suicide at the Golden Temple in Amritsar.
The firearm mishap, which involved the judge’s security detail, led to an intensive investigation by Haryana IPS officer Manisha Chaudhary. Despite her findings suggesting the incident was unrelated to the judge and her intention to file a closure report, the court has raised concerns over conflicting reports from Chandigarh Police that suggest an increased threat to the judge.
During proceedings, a bench consisting of Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sudhir Singh expressed dismay over the lack of coherence between the investigation outcomes and the perceived threat reports provided by the police. “The investigation concludes the incident is unrelated to the judge, yet you claim it has raised a threat perception. How can two conflicting positions be taken?” questioned the bench.
The court’s frustration was evident as it challenged the proposal by the counsel for the Chandigarh Administration to reevaluate the threat level after consulting with Haryana Police. The judges were skeptical of the police’s ability to retract statements previously submitted to the court and questioned the overall communication and coordination among security agencies.
