SC stays Tripura HC order seeking threat perception details of Ambani family
29 June, 2022 | Vaishali Sharma
The Supreme Court stayed the Tripura High Court orders on Wednesday, which had sought from the Centre the details on the danger perception based on which security cover was extended to Reliance Ind...
The Supreme Court stayed the Tripura High Court orders on Wednesday, which had sought from the Centre the details on the danger perception based on which security cover was extended to Reliance Industries chairman Mukesh Ambani and his family in Mumbai.
A bench of Justices Surya Kant and JB Pardiwala also issued notice on the Centre’s plea challenging the orders of the High Court seeking security details of the Ambani family. “Issue notice returnable on July 22, 2022. Meanwhile, implementation of orders dated May 31, 2022, and June 21, 2022, passed by Tripura High Court shall remain stayed,” the bench stated in its order.
Tushar Mehta, arguing for the Centre, informed a bench that the High Court had asked for facts on the threat perception based on which security protection was extended to the Ambanis in Mumbai.
According to the Solicitor General, the protection provided to the family in Mumbai has nothing to do with the Tripura government, and the High Court lacks jurisdiction to hear the PIL.
Earlier on Monday, he mentioned the subject for urgent hearing, stating that the High Court had called officials from the Union Home Ministry to appear before it on June 28 with papers relevant to danger perception.
The Central Government filed an appeal against the High Court’s ruling directing the government to place the original file kept by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) regarding the Ambani family’s danger perception and assessment report made by it.
The appeal in the apex court said, “The PIL is filed by an individual person who had no locus in the matter and was just a meddlesome interloper, claiming himself to be a social activist and student by profession.”
“The petition is a misconceived, frivolous and motivated public interest litigation petition, where no violation of any fundamental right was even pleaded, the High Court has sought to exercise its judicial review jurisdiction over a decision which has been taken by trained experts on public order, individual and national security,” the government in its plea stated.
The High Court failed to recognise that the family members were neither Tripura residents, nor was any aspect of the cause of action remotely related to Tripura. As a result, the High Court has neither geographical nor subject matter jurisdiction over the case, it added.