2025:HHC:28231 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No. 11859 of 2025 Decided on : 20.08.2025 Shri Pankaj Sharma. …Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others. …Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Mr. M.A. Safee, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, with Mr. Rahul Thakur, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents No.1 to 4. Mr. Janesh Mahajan, Advocate, for respondent No.5. Sh. B.P. Singh, IO/DSP/CBI/SC-I, New Delhi, present in person. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has, inter alia, prayed for the following reliefs:- “i) That a writ in the nature of Certiorari may kindly be issued quashing and declaring as illegal, arbitrary, and unconstitutional the action of the Respondents whereby the Petitioner, despite being merely under suspension 1Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2025:HHC:28231 and not facing any preventive custody order, has been forcibly confined to Set No. 1, Police Guest House, Kaithu Lines, Shimla, and is being subjected to 24x7 physical surveillance by guards as well as continuous electronic monitoring through installation of a CCTV camera inside his room. Such coercive measures, taken without any lawful authority or judicial sanction, are patently violative of the Petitioner's fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and are in gross breach of Rule 16.21 of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934 (as applicable to Himachal Pradesh), which does not permit custodial confinement or round- the-clock surveillance of a suspended police officer. ii) That a writ in the nature of Mandamus, directing the Respondents to immediately lift all unlawful and coercive restrictions imposed upon the liberty and withdrawal of armed guard personnel posted round-the- clock outside and inside the premises of his accommodation, and the removal of the CCTV camera installed inside his personal room, and further direct the Respondents to permit the Petitioner to reside at his allotted Government accommodation at Bharari, Shimla and without subjecting him to any form of illegal surveillance, custody, or detention under the pretext of "security.” 2. The case of the petitioner is that he has been placed under suspension on 19.05.2025 pursuant to the lodging of an FIR i.e. FIR No. 9/2025, dated 19.03.2025, registered under Sections 108 and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya 3 2025:HHC:28231 Sanhita, 2023, at Police Station New Shimla, District Shimla. Thereafter, on 23.05.2025, this Court in CWP no. 6508 of 2025 titled Smt. Kiran Negi Vs. State of H.P. & Ors., has ordered the transfer of the investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation. On 24.05.2025, respondent No.2 issued directions to respondent No.3 to provide round-the-clock security to the petitioner. According, to the petitioner, after issuance of these directions, the petitioner is forcibly lodged in Set No.1 of the Police Guest House, Kaithu. He has been placed under 24 hour watch. A Police Guard has been deputed continuously and CCTV camera has also been installed inside his room so as to carry out surveillance upon him. The petitioner has not been allowed to visit his government accommodation at Bharari, where his family is residing. According to the petitioner, his detention violates his Fundamental Rights and it is in this backdrop that he has approached this Court praying for the reliefs already quoted hereinabove. 3. Learned Advocate General, on instructions, informs the Court that the act of the respondents was based on threat 4 2025:HHC:28231 perception taking into consideration the seriousness of the allegations that were there in the FIR concerned, however, State is not averse to review the said arrangement, more so, in the light of the fact that now the case is not being investigated by the State Agencies but is being investigated by the Central Bureau of Investigation. 4. Mr. Janesh Mahajan, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.5, on instructions, submits that as far as this issue is concerned, the Central Bureau of Investigation has got nothing to do with it for the reason that the alleged detention of the petitioner is not at the behest of the Central Bureau of Investigation and they have no objection if the State intends to review the arrangement. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the light of the statement made by learned Advocate General and learned counsel for respondent No.5-CBI, respondents be directed to take appropriate action forthwith and as expeditiously as possible. 6. In the light of the statement made by learned Advocate General as well as learned counsel for respondent 5 2025:HHC:28231 No.5-CBI, this writ petition is disposed of with the direction that let the State forthwith review the present arrangement, so that it is ensured that whereas, in case, petitioner needs security, the same be provided to him, however, in a manner that does not curtail his Fundamental Rights, enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Let needful be done, as expeditiously as possible and the petitioner be also allowed to meet his family forthwith, as has been prayed. Decision be taken with regard to his security etc. of the petitioner by taking the petitioner into confidence. 7. The petition is disposed of, in above-said terms. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge August 20, 2025 (Shivank Thakur)