THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.16285 of 2007 Between: Y.Ramesh Reddy. .. PETITIONER and The Deputy Inspector General of Police and others. .. RESPONDENTS ORDER: It is the case of the petitioner that on threat perception, he has been provided an armed gunman for the last four years. But, however, without there being any revised report relating to the threat perception, a memo in C.No.08/R I/Kadapa/2007, dated 24-04-2007, has been issued to the petitioner withdrawing the said gunman. It is stated that earlier two gunmen were provided, but subsequently one gunman was withdrawn and only one gunman was provided till 24-04-2007. As the gunman was withdrawn, the petitioner made a representation, dated 30-04-2007, to the Superintendent of Police, Kadapa-2nd respondent. Pursuant to the said representation, the 2nd respondent asked the Circle Inspector of Police, Kondapuram-3rd respondent to submit a report with regard to the threat perception of the petitioner vide C.No.81/PSO/KDP/07, dated 24-05-2007. Accordingly, the 3rd respondent submitted a detailed report to the 2nd respondent on 26-05-2007 stating that there is every possibility of life threat to the petitioner, that he is anticipating life threat wherever he moves and stays and that already an armed gunman is provided to the petitioner. It is further stated that faction and political ill feelings are existing between the petitioner and one Sona Ramachandrudu. In the year 2003, the said Sona Ramachandrudu and 21 others of Chinthakunta and Anantapur District made an attempt on the life of the petitioner by hurling bombs on his vehicle and inflicted bomb splinter and caused severe injuries. Subsequently, the followers of the petitioner also attacked and killed one Sane Guravaiah. Inititally, though the petitioner was figured as an accused, the charge against him was not proved and therefore, his name was removed from the charge-sheet. Due to the above incident, the faction ill feelings between both groups became aggravated. In the recent past, the petitioner contested to the post of ZPTC of Muddanur on behalf of TDP and defeated. Therefore, he recommended for providing an armed gunman on payment basis for the protection of the petitioner. Admittedly, the application of the petitioner, dated 30-04-2007, is pending before the 2nd respondent. Therefore, it is just and proper to direct the 2nd respondent to consider of dispose of the said application. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the report submitted by the 3rd respondent on 26-05-2007, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider and dispose of the application of the petitioner, dated 30-04-2007, for providing gunman on payment basis, for protection of the petitioner. Till the application of the petitioner is considered and disposed of, the petitioner shall be provided gunman on payment basis, for his protection. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________ 31-07-2007 Prv