Police protection for businessman and family allegedly getting threats from MP Kirron Kher

The Punjab and Haryana High Court issued an order on Monday instructing the
Superintendent of Police in Chandigarh and the relevant Station House Officer to provide
security to a local businessman and his family. The move comes after they reported receiving threats from BJP MP Kirron Kher and her aide Sahdev Salaria.
Chaittnya Aggarwal, the Chandigarh-based businessman, asserted through his counsel, Anmol Rattan Sidhu, that he, along with his wife and two minor daughters, fears for their lives and liberty due to alleged threats from Kirron Kher and Sahdev Salaria. Aggarwal
claimed in his petition that these threats were linked to financial disputes with Kher.
Public Prosecutor Manish Bansal argued that no formal complaint had been lodged in anyChandigarh police station by the petitioner, his wife, or minor daughters. He mentioned that since the alleged incidents occurred within a private residence, it would be inappropriate for
the police to intervene without an official complaint. The petitioner's counsel, however, contended that Article 21 of the Constitution takesprecedence, and there is no obligation for the petitioner to first contact the Helpline No.112. The court, presided over by Justice Anoop Chitkara, directed, "It shall be appropriate that the concerned Superintendent of Police and the concerned SHO provide appropriate protection to the petitioner for one week from today." The court specified that the protection could be discontinued before the week's end if the petitioner requests it.The court imposed stringent conditions on the protection, stating that the petitioner and his wife should not leave their place of residence boundaries except for medical needs, buying
household necessities, or attending close relatives' or friends' bereavements. However, thisrestriction does not apply to the petitioner's minor daughters. Any violation of these conditions would result in automatic recall of the protection order.
The order also specified that if the petitioner or his wife violates the conditions, the police officials can leave the premises after informing the Station House Officer or Superintendent of Police through electronic means or sending a message. The SHO/Superintendent ofPolice should promptly respond to any messages reporting a violation of the court order.