
Chandigarh, October 7 (Daily Kiran) : The legal battle between the Punjab government and the Punjab and Haryana High Court over a corruption investigation has escalated to the Supreme Court. A hearing is scheduled for Thursday, where the Supreme Court will review the Punjab government’s petition. The bench will be led by Justices Dipankar Dutta and Sheel Nagu.
The Punjab government is contesting a High Court order that directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to investigate corruption allegations against certain officials linked to the state government and the Chief Minister‘s Office. The High Court had instructed the CBI to file a report within two months.
This order stemmed from a public interest litigation filed by advocate Nikhil Saraf. The High Court’s division bench mandated the CBI to register a First Information Report (FIR) and initiate an immediate investigation. The court emphasized the need for the CBI to present its findings within the stipulated two-month timeframe.
The petition alleges a network of corruption and illicit transactions involving transfers, appointments, tenders, licenses, and various government positions. It also claims that transfers of senior administrative and police officials were influenced by corrupt practices.
Given the serious nature of the allegations, the High Court deemed it necessary to ensure transparency and fairness in the investigation by ordering a CBI inquiry. In response, the Punjab government has opposed this order and sought recourse in the Supreme Court, arguing that the previous Congress government had withdrawn general consent for CBI investigations in Punjab in November 2020. This forms the basis of their challenge against the High Court’s directive.
Punjab’s Finance Minister, Harpal Singh Cheema, has also stated that the state government will appeal the High Court’s decision in the Supreme Court. The upcoming hearing is being closely watched, as it will determine whether the CBI investigation, as mandated by the High Court, will proceed. The political and legal implications of this case make the hearing particularly significant.
Leave a Comment