mgn IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION PIL PETITION NO.43 OF 2009 Manoranjan Santosh Roy ...Petitioner Vs. Union of India & Ors. ..Respondents Petitioner in person present Mr. A.M. Sethna with Mr. M.I. Sethna for respondent No.1. Mr. D.A. Nalawade, Govt. Pleader for respondent Nos. 6 to 8 CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & J.H. BHATIA, JJ. DATED : 14TH JANUARY, 2010 P.C. Petitioner in person by the present petition seeks relief by way of adequate police security to all informers and their family members and further to direct the respondents not to disclose the identity of the informers to anyone under any circumstances. 2. The policy of the Government of India whether Departments of Income-tax, Customs and/or Central Excise is to keep the identity of the informer secret. The question, therefore, of the identity of the informer being disclosed does not arise and consequently of providing any police protection. In a case where any informer’s identity is disclosed it will be open to that informer to move the concerned authority for protection in which event the concerned authority to take steps in such specific case to see what protection can be given to the informer and his family members. 3. In so far as payment of rewards is concerned, there is a scheme for payment of rewards. Apart from that similar issues were before the learned Supreme Court. The law as now declared is that the payment to be made only after the amounts are realised. In that light of the matter, in our opinion, this will not be a fit case for us to exercise our extra ordinary jurisdiction, more so in a PIL. 4. In so far as the information of the companies is concerned, the respondents have filed their reply. It will be open to the petitioner to move the concerned Registrar of Companies for the necessary information by following due procedure. Petition accordingly disposed off. (J.H. BHATIA, J.) (F,I. REBELLO,J.)