The latest figures emerging from neighbouring Haryana have once again raised an important question for Punjab: how many politically influential, wealthy, controversial or otherwise high-profile individuals are receiving police protection at public expense, how many police personnel are being diverted to protect them, and what is the annual cost to the Punjab exchequer?
Haryana’s government has disclosed that 396 people were provided security after receiving threats from gangsters, involving 691 police personnel. The development comes amid growing concern over organised crime and extortion. Haryana Chief Minister Nayab Singh Saini recently acknowledged a 17% increase in extortion cases, with 296 cases reported up to July 2026 compared with 253 during the corresponding period of 2025. The government has attributed part of the challenge to gangs operating from abroad and using digital platforms.
The Haryana figures provide an interesting benchmark for Punjab, where gangster threats, extortion, targeted killings and overseas-operated criminal networks have also become serious law-and-order concerns. Punjab has witnessed repeated allegations and reports concerning threats issued by gangsters operating from abroad, while political leaders, businessmen, religious figures and other prominent individuals have at different times sought or received police protection.
The most important question is not whether genuinely threatened individuals should receive security. They absolutely should. The real issue is whether police protection in Punjab is being provided strictly on the basis of professionally assessed threat perception or whether, in some cases, security has gradually become a symbol of political influence, wealth and social status.
A January 2026 report by The Tribune highlighted the continuing deployment of large numbers of Punjab Police personnel with political leaders despite an acute shortage of police manpower. The report questioned whether security arrangements sanctioned under previous governments continue even when the original threat perception may have changed.This is an issue that deserves an independent and transparent review rather than political accusations.Punjab has previously had one of the country’s largest VIP-security burdens. Bureau of Police Research and Development data reported in 2020 showed Punjab providing protection to more than 2,500 VIPs, placing it among the states with the highest number of protected persons.
The scale of the problem has also been demonstrated during major events. In November 2025, Punjab Police reserved 9,952 personnel for security and law-and-order arrangements surrounding the commemoration of the 350th martyrdom anniversary of Guru Tegh Bahadur at Sri Anandpur Sahib, when large numbers of pilgrims and VVIPs were expected.The cost of VIP security should not be measured merely through salaries and allowances.Every police officer assigned permanently to protect an individual is an officer who is potentially unavailable for patrolling, investigation, traffic management, cybercrime investigation, women’s safety, village policing and emergency response.
Punjab already faces significant demands on its police force. If hundreds or thousands of personnel are deployed for personal protection, ordinary citizens can legitimately ask whether they are receiving an adequate policing service in return for their taxes.There is also the cost of vehicles, fuel, weapons, communications equipment, accommodation, overtime, training and administrative support. A proper calculation should therefore include the full annual cost per protected person, rather than simply the salary of the assigned constables.
Who are Punjab’s “big fish” receiving security?
Punjab should publish, subject to legitimate national-security exemptions, a broad statistical breakdown of its protected-person system.Number of cases in which threat perception was subsequently found to have diminished.Such information would allow taxpayers to understand whether the system is genuinely threat-based.Punjab cannot afford a system in which a person gets a police escort simply because he or she is politically powerful or socially influential.At the same time, the government must not make the opposite mistake of withdrawing protection from genuinely threatened people merely to demonstrate that it is against VIP culture. Punjab has already learned painful lessons about the consequences of security decisions. In 2022, the withdrawal of security from 424 people became a major controversy following the assassination of singer and political figure Sidhu Moosewala; the government subsequently announced restoration of security for many of those whose protection had been withdrawn.The lesson should be clear: security decisions must be based on intelligence, professional threat assessment and periodic review not political calculations.
The Haryana figures are particularly relevant because they demonstrate how rapidly gangster threats can create a demand for police protection. Providing 691 police personnel to 396 threatened people means that the state is committing a substantial manpower resource to personal protection.At the same time, Haryana is attempting to confront the criminal networks generating those threats. Its police have reported extensive arrests of gang members, including 3,210 gang members arrested during 2024, 2025 and through July 2026, along with international efforts involving deportations, Look Out Circulars and Red Corner Notices.
Punjab needs the same two-pronged approach: protect the threatened individual while simultaneously dismantling the criminal network issuing the threat.Giving a businessman or political leader four or five policemen after a gangster demands money may protect that individual temporarily. But if the gangster remains free to threaten dozens of other people, the underlying problem remains unresolved.The Punjab government should therefore undertake a statewide security audit and place the findings before the Punjab Legislative Assembly.The people of Punjab have a right to know whether the state is spending hundreds of crores or potentially more protecting influential individuals while police stations in ordinary towns and villages struggle with manpower shortages.
The government should also establish a rule that every security cover is reviewed periodically, with written intelligence-based justification for continuation. Security should automatically be reduced when the assessed threat declines and increased immediately when credible intelligence indicates a genuine danger.The principle should be simple: the police belong to the people, and public money should primarily be used to protect the public.Punjab certainly needs to protect genuine targets of gangster threats. But it also needs to protect the shopkeeper receiving an extortion call, the businessman being threatened, the farmer facing criminal intimidation, the woman seeking help at a police station and the ordinary citizen waiting for a police response.
The Haryana figures—396 threatened persons and 691 police personnel—should therefore prompt Punjab to answer a straightforward question: How many people are currently enjoying police protection in Punjab, how many policemen are deployed with them, and exactly how much does this VIP-security system cost the Punjab taxpayer every year?That is not merely a question of VIP culture. It is a question of public safety, police priorities, accountability and the proper use of taxpayers’ money.
Disclaimer: This article and accompanying images are for informational and illustrative purposes only. Some visuals may be AI-generated or digitally enhanced and may not depict actual events or persons.Views expressed are based on publicly available information and analysis