The High Court of Punjab and Haryana on Tuesday warned that it would have to “severely indict the Haryana government for its ‘recourse’ in ‘pending order petitions’ for failing to proceed with the investigation of cases against former MPs, Houses and statutory contractors in Haryana. Pass appropriate orders.” “If there is no progress in the investigation.
“In the absence of further progress in the investigation of the cases, the court will have to take a serious view of the matter itself and issue appropriate orders, until the responsibility of the officer in question is determined,” a member of the department of Justices Augustine George Masih and Lalit Batra said.
The bench was hearing the order on its own regarding adjournment of cases against former MPs, sitting MPs, and MLAs.
On Tuesday, the Government of Haryana, through the Inspector General of Police (Crime Branch, Gurugram) Dr. Raj Shri Singh, provided an affidavit.
The High Commissioner, upon receipt of the affidavit, said, “The same story appears to be repeated here as it relates to cases under investigation up to 2005. The shelter, which is sought to be taken over for not proceeding with the investigation, is suspending written petitions.”
With regard to a question posed by the Court as to whether the Court of Appeal granted any stay of investigation or filing of the challan, the attorney representing the state government replied in the negative. For this purpose, the court said, “If this is the case, it appears that the Haryana Investigation Agency is only resorting to delaying the investigation and not proceeding with it. These excuses, as we have indicated, are inadmissible and there is no objection to the investigation of the matter and the submission of the report under Section 173 of the Criminal Procedure Act before Magistrate’s Judge / Appropriate Jurisdiction Court.
Another aspect that emerged during the proceedings was that the sound samples were not taken or not provided by the accused. Haryana’s lawyer, unable to respond to this aspect, prayed for the postponement.
The court adjourned the hearing to September 7, but directed that the “request be accomplished within four weeks.”
Punjab government also submitted its case report by affidavit from the Assistant Inspector General of Police, Litigation and Bureau of Investigation, according to which 48 information information districts are still in the investigation stage.
As for Punjab, First Deputy Solicitor General Gaurav Garg Dhiriwala indicated that most of the cases under investigation are from 2022. However, he acknowledged that there is deviation in relation to the older cases. He further stated that he would provide a detailed report on the status of the investigation phase and the time it would likely take to bring the two shawls to court.
Regarding the cases in which the investigation was completed and Chalan presented, senior attorney Rubinder Khosla, Amicus Coreai, noted that the stage of the trial was not mentioned.
Amicus Curiae claimed that it was not even mentioned whether it was for the prosecution or the evidence for the defense and was not duly mentioned as to the number of witnesses questioned or whom the prosecution intended to question. Garg, acknowledging this shortcoming, called for some time to provide details.
For Chandigarh, Senior Permanent Counsel Anil Mehta made a case report. Among other things, Utah attorney stated by affidavit, FIR is registered against former MLAs in Punjab for protesting outside CM residence in Chandigarh. Mehta confirmed that CCTV footage of CM’s residence is awaiting her. The competent authority shall require this and refer the decision to the investigation authority within a period of four weeks.
The High Commissioner said looking at the report submitted by the Supreme Court, which shows the stage of the case, shows that the same is lacking in prestige with regard to the stage and condition of the trial. “It has been stated in this report that in some cases the presence of the accused is sought for nearly a year and why the investigation agency has not contacted the court to take coercive steps to ensure the attendance of the accused, against whom the challan has been filed.”
“Let said information, along with the status of each case including the witnesses examined and those remaining, be submitted and presented to the court within four weeks,” the High Commissioner ordered.