HC to pronounce verdict on PIL alleging corruption in Punjab government on October 5

A Bench comprising Chief Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Rohit Kapoor had earlier reserved its verdict, among other things, on the issue of maintainability after hearing lengthy and elaborate arguments from all sides over no fewer than six hearings.

Appearing before the Bench, the ED blamed the government for not acting on the letter sent by its Jalandhar zone to the state DGP. “The government did not perform its Rajdharam; instead, it indulged in Rajnitik Dharam,” senior advocate and Additional Solicitor-General Satya Pal Jain contended.

The state, on the other hand, sought three weeks’ time to place before the Bench the final status report in the matter. “We will communicate the final status on this within a period of three weeks. That’s the maximum that we are seeking. We are already in the process…. We are looking into every nitty-gritty. We will nip the evil in the bud,” senior advocate Vikram Chaudhary contended on behalf of the state.

Chaudhary, during the course of the hearing, questioned why the ED took 90 days to send a communication to the Punjab DGP. “They are questioning a 14-day delay by us. But they took 90 days to write to us and want us to register a criminal case without complying with the statutory obligations,” Chaudhary said, adding that the Punjab Police was required to examine the material supplied by the ED, the nature of the offences alleged and the applicability of the law in each respect.

The petitioner, practising lawyer Nikhil Saraf, had stated that communications had been sent by the Enforcement Directorate under Section 66(2) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, to the state of Punjab. “Despite such facts, as well as other facts of corruption in high public office having been highlighted by the petitioner also, no action is being taken in the matter,” he added.

In his petition, Saraf stated that a part of the complaint is available on social media with various journalists and politicians. According to the petition, the main allegations were against public persons, public servants and other private individuals working in the Chief Minister’s Office. The petition said some of them were very close to the family of the Chief Minister.