The Punjab and Haryana High Court has directed the Haryana government to revoke security provided to IAS officers who are not involved in key administrative or judicial roles. This decision has prompted discussions about the use of security for public officials, with many questioning whether it is a necessity or merely a status symbol.
Public Concerns Over Security as a Status Symbol
Several members of the public have expressed concerns that some IAS officers are using security as a symbol of prestige rather than for addressing actual threats. In many instances, no proper threat assessment has been conducted by local intelligence agencies or police, yet officers are still receiving protection.
Strain on Police Resources
The allocation of security to these officers is putting a significant strain on police resources. A large number of police personnel are being assigned to protect officers, which is pulling manpower away from more essential public safety tasks. Many believe this is negatively affecting the overall efficiency of law enforcement in the state.
Court Review of Security Arrangements
After reviewing the current security arrangements, the High Court emphasized that protection should only be provided to officers who face real risks or are working on sensitive tasks. The court ordered the Director General of Police (DGP) to submit a report by October 28, explaining how security decisions were made and whether threat assessments were carried out for the officers currently receiving protection.
Concerns About Impact on Police Duties
The court also raised concerns about the impact of unnecessary security allocations on police operations. With police resources stretched thin, public safety and crime prevention efforts are being compromised. This diversion of manpower has become a significant issue for law enforcement.
Review of Security Protocols
In response to these issues, the High Court asked the DGP to review the protocols for assigning security and ensure that it is based on genuine risks, not routine practice. The court made it clear that only those officers who require protection due to specific risks should continue receiving security, especially given the shortages in police personnel.
Public Reactions and Next Steps
The public has pointed out that some officials seem to be using security for status, which adds unnecessary pressure on an already overstretched police force. The lack of proper threat assessments has fueled these concerns, with many calling for security to be allocated based on real need.
The High Court has scheduled the next hearing for October 28, by which time the DGP is expected to provide a detailed report on how security is managed. This case may lead to reforms that ensure security is provided only to those who truly need it, freeing up police personnel for more critical duties.
it is merely status symbol until and unless to resolve any public dispute / riots where security is mandatory
it is my personal opinion