Centre seeks to withdraw CRPF security cover for Unnao rape survivor

This development comes after an assessment reportedly found no substantial evidence of ongoing threats to the individuals involved, leading the Centre to question the need for continued CRPF protection.

In Short

• Supreme Court asks survivors to respond to Centre's request
• The centre cites no substantial threats in its recent assessment
• CRPF facing operational difficulties and financial burden, says Centre

The centre has filed a petition before the Supreme Court to withdraw the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) security cover provided to the Unnao rape survivor and 13 others connected to the case. This development comes after an assessment reportedly found no substantial evidence of ongoing threats to the individuals involved, leading the Centre to question the need for continued CRPF protection.

The Supreme Court, on Tuesday, asked the survivors and other affected individuals to respond to the Centre’s request, which seeks to modify the court's August 2019 order that granted them security. The government argued that the security cover should now be handled by the state police, based on local threat assessments.

The government, citing a recent threat assessment, said there was no specific danger to the survivors or their legal representatives. “The perceived threat from supporters of the convicted individuals is not backed by tangible evidence," the Centre's plea stated. "Local law enforcement can address any general security concerns."

The plea also highlighted the operational and logistical difficulties faced by CRPF personnel, who have reportedly been subjected to “misuse” and adverse working conditions. According to the Centre, CRPF troops deployed for this duty lack adequate accommodation, toilet facilities, and sufficient support from local police.

Additionally, the Centre’s plea expressed concerns over the financial burden of maintaining this security detail, calling it “unnecessary and undesirable” at this point.

The petition revealed multiple challenges faced by CRPF personnel in securing the protectees, including incidents where the survivors and their associates allegedly manhandled security officers, failed to cooperate, and made sudden movements without informing the personnel. In some instances, protectees reportedly threatened to implicate CRPF personnel in false cases or to harm themselves, further complicating security operations.

The Centre also noted that the current security arrangement places an undue strain on the public exchequer.

The security cover for the Unnao rape survivor, her family, and her legal team was ordered by the Supreme Court in 2019 after widespread outrage over the handling of the case. The survivor, who accused a powerful politician of sexual assault, faced significant threats, and there were serious concerns for her safety.

Since then, the CRPF has provided round-the-clock protection for 14 individuals, as mandated by the court. However, the Centre has now submitted that it is more appropriate for the local police to take over the security arrangements, should any specific threats arise.

The Supreme Court is expected to consider the responses of the survivors and others affected by this proposed change in security. Meanwhile, the government remains firm in its request to free the CRPF from this duty, shifting responsibility to the state government.

The court had previously rejected a similar request from the Centre in May 2024, but advised the government to file a formal application for modification, which led to this latest appeal.

As the case moves forward, the court’s decision will determine whether the Unnao rape survivor and those connected to the case continue to receive central security or rely on local law enforcement for their protection.