By Admin 
The more intense the politics of Uttar Pradesh is, the more sensitive is the security arrangements of the Chief Minister. Whenever the tight security of CM Yogi Adityanath is seen, a question definitely arises in the mind that how much is spent on this security cover every year and who pays for it? Does this responsibility entirely rest with the state government or is the Center also a stakeholder in it? This report reveals this truth layer by layer. Let’s find out.
What is the security category of CM Yogi
Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath is among the few leaders of the country who get Z+ category security. Under the current system, trained commandos, modern weapons, bulletproof vehicles, jammer systems and 24×7 close protection teams are deployed for their security. This is decided on the basis of threat assessment done from time to time by security intelligence agencies.
How much is spent on security every year?
According to government budget documents and estimates revealed through various RTIs, the annual expenditure on the security of Chief Minister Yogi is believed to be between Rs 25 to 30 crore. This includes the cost of salaries of security personnel, training, weapons, vehicles, fuel, logistics support and technical equipment. However, the government does not usually release detailed public information on individual security costs.
Who bears the expenses, Center or State?
This question is most important. According to the constitutional system, the primary responsibility for the security of the Chief Minister of a state lies with the state government. Even if central forces like NSG or CRPF are deployed for security, its expenses are borne by the concerned state government. That is, even though the forces are central, the payment is made from the state treasury. Uttar Pradesh government also bears most of the expenses related to the security of CM Yogi.
Why is such tight security necessary?
CM Yogi’s name comes among those leaders who have been continuously receiving threats for various reasons. Given their political role, administrative decisions and public activities, they are considered high risk by security agencies. For this reason, there is no laxity in security and the system is further strengthened when necessary.
Security spending versus constitutional obligations
Experts believe that the security of a person holding a constitutional post cannot be seen only from the perspective of expenditure. This is not only a matter of the individual but also of the administrative stability and law and order of the state. For this reason, governments consider spending on security necessary.
Also read: Can a common man also take his problem to the PM, know how to meet the Prime Minister?