MP Subramanian Swamy (File) The Centre informed the Delhi High Court on Thursday that appropriate security arrangements have been made to ensure the safety of former Rajya Sabha MP Subramanian Swamy at his private residence in Delhi.
Appearing for the Centre, Additional Solicitor General Sanjay Jain informed the single judge bench of Justice Yashwant Varma that “security agencies are satisfied that appropriate arrangements have been made for ensuring the safety and security of Swamy, considering that he is a Z category protectee”.
Following this submission, Senior Advocate Jayant Mehta, appearing for Swamy, submitted that his client would vacate the government accommodation by Saturday under intimation to the concerned estate officer, pursuant to which the high court disposed of the matter.
On September 14, the high court had directed Swamy to vacate within six weeks the government accommodation, in the Lutyens Bungalow Zone, that he was allotted in 2016. The court, however, said that authorities should “ensure that adequate arrangements are made in the residential premises which the petitioner shall now occupy so that his security is safeguarded.”
Swamy then moved the high court claiming that the Centre failed to ensure security arrangements at his private residence.
On Monday, the high court had directed the Centre to file a “better and comprehensive affidavit” to show that they will ensure adequate security for Swamy at his private residence.
The Centre had informed the high court that they have filed an affidavit of compliance stating that a “joint security review” was conducted at Swamy’s private residence and “the day he moves to his private residence the entire security set up will also be moved along with him”.
Mehta had said then that no steps had been taken despite the assurance given by the Centre on September 14. Mehta had further said that “not one infrastructure has been moved” to Swamy’s private residence, including “sentry gates”. He said facilities for security personnel to take rest have to be there.
The Centre had argued that if there is space at the private residence, infrastructure facilities for the personnel will be created. “But if there is no space, what we do is we post six guards whom we keep rotating. To put this setup in a colony may not be possible. Whatever his entitlement, he will get,” he said.
The Centre had said that it would put up tents for the guards at Swamy’s private residence. The high court had observed that the “movement of security setup can’t be simultaneous” with Swamy’s move to his private residence.
When the Centre’s counsel submitted that the guards would be rotated, the court asked him how the security personnel would rest, stand or sit. The counsel then said the government would submit the details in an affidavit.