New Delhi, Aug.30,2025:High Court orders security for complainant—a dramatic judicial move that underscores the growing risks faced by citizens pursuing high-stakes legal actions.
The Court Landmark Order
The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court has ordered that Central Armed Police Forces assign a Personal Security Officer (PSO) for round-the-clock protection to a complainant alleging threats while pursuing high-profile cases against Rahul Gandhi and Priyanka Gandhi Vadra.
Who Is the Complainant and What Triggered the Order?
The petition was filed by S. Vignesh Shishir, a Karnataka-based worker connected to the BJP. He has filed multiple PILs in the Allahabad High Court alleging that Rahul Gandhi holds British citizenship—claims which led to CBI investigations.
Judicial Reasoning Behind the Security Directive
A division bench of Justices Sangeeta Chandra and Brij Raj Singh noted that Shishir, having filed his complaints and repeatedly appeared before investigative agencies, had received “palpable threats” and was “pursuing cases against a very powerful individual.” The bench deemed the request for a PSO reasonable to enable him to continue the legal process “without fear.”
Citizenship Battle and Prior Pleas
Shishir filed his initial complaint in June 2024 with the CBI’s Special Crime Branch in Lucknow, alleging Rahul Gandhi’s British citizenship. He submitted his evidence in Delhi and also attempted to challenge Priyanka Gandhi’s candidacy in Wayanad via quo warranto proceedings.
Government Response & Further Hearing
The High Court has directed the central government to respond to the petition by October 9, 2025, also instructing them to file a counter-affidavit regarding the security request.
Legal Precedent and Safety Protocols
- Judicial Safeguarding: This order reinforces that courts may intervene to ensure the safety of litigants facing threats in politically sensitive cases.
- Witness Protection Expansion: It highlights the growing interplay between legal rights and personal security under the official Witness Protection Scheme.
- Precedent for High-Stakes Litigation: Those pursuing powerful individuals may now point to this judgment when seeking protective measures amid credible threats.
External Resources for Deep Dive
- LiveLaw: In-depth coverage of the High Court’s interim security order
- Times of India: Broader context on threats and the citizenship battle
- Bar & Bench: Legal details including request for Y-plus category security and investigative process
This landmark decision—where High Court orders security for complainant—marks a significant judicial acknowledgment of the threats faced by public-spirited individuals challenging high-profile figures. As the October 9 hearing approaches, all eyes are on how government bodies will comply, and how this case may influence future litigation involving sensitive political figures. Let me know if you’d like AI-driven enhancements or tone tweaks for publication!
