scorecardresearch
Follow Us:
Friday, February 26, 2021

2018 graft case in Punjab: HC stays CBI court’s order directing IGP Dhillon to provide voice samples

It was earlier alleged that the bribe was taken on pretext of giving a clean chit to a former SP of Punjab Vigilance bureau, against whom a probe was pending with IG Dhillon.

By: Express News Service | Chandigarh |
February 14, 2021 4:26:14 am
Punjab and Haryana High Court, IGP’s anticipatory bail, Umranangal, Punjab news, chandigarh news, indian expressPunjab and Haryana High Court

The Punjab and Haryana High Court stayed the operations of orders of the special CBI court of Chandigarh, wherein the Punjab Police Inspector General, (IG) Gurinder Singh Dhillon, to provide his voice sample in connection with a 2018 graft case.

The bench of Justice Amol Rattan Singh, while issuing notice of motion returnable on February 19, 2021, ordered, “The order dated January 29, 2021 passed by the Judge, Special Court, CBI, Chandigarh, be positively placed on record by way of an appropriate application prior to the next date of hearing. In the meanwhile, the operation of the orders dated January 29 and February 1, as regards the directions issued to the petitioner to provide his voice sample, shall remain stayed till the next date of hearing before this court.”

Challenging the special CBI court’s order at the HC, Dhillon sought to quash it.

Dhillon, through his counsels, Advocate Senior Advocate Jasjit Singh Bedi and Advocate Rubal Garg, has contended that as a matter of fact the original order directing the petitioner to provide his voice sample is not the one dated February 1, but the order passed prior thereto on January 29, by which the petitioner had actually been directed to provide his voice sample, the order dated February 1, thereafter directing him to provide it on February 15.

Dhillon’s counsel contended that though undoubtedly in the order dated January 29, 2021 the Special Judge has referred to the judgment of the Supreme Court in Ritesh Sinha versus State of Uttar Pradesh and another 2019, however, the special Judge has completely misinterpreted the ratio of the said judgment to be applicable to a witness in a criminal prosecution, whereas actually what has been held by their Lordships, is wholly in the context of an accused.

It was further argued that in fact the petitioner is not presently an accused in the trial before the Special Judge, CBI, Chandigarh, and in fact is only a witness, though allegations have been made against him, and that no sanction having been obtained from the state government under the provisions of Section 17-A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 2018, the petitioner in any case cannot be treated as an accused before the trial court.

The HC bench, after hearing the arguments, issued notice to the CBI. The case of CBI pertains to August 16, 2018, when the CBI had arrested Ludhiana resident, Ashok Goyal, for allegedly accepting a bribe of Rs five lakh.

It was earlier alleged that the bribe was taken on pretext of giving a clean chit to a former SP of Punjab Vigilance bureau, against whom a probe was pending with IG Dhillon.

📣 The Indian Express is now on Telegram. Click here to join our channel (@indianexpress) and stay updated with the latest headlines

For all the latest Chandigarh News, download Indian Express App.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement