Bhagwant Mann govt revokes suspension of IPS officer Parmar, dept probe continues

While Parmar remained under suspension for four months, the government had revoked the suspension of Swarandeep and Harpreet in May. A departmental inquiry had been ordered against Parmar for alleged lapses in investigating a scam and that inquiry is still under progress, informed a senior police officer.

There has not been any official word on the reason why Parmar and other officials were suspended though Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) functionaries had made certain allegations against them at the time of suspension. However, these allegations did not seem to hold any water as the two AIG/SSP level vigilance officials were reinstated to their original posts and one of them played a prominent part in arresting SAD leader Bikram Singh Majithia in the disproportionate assets case.

In April 2025, the Punjab government, had initiated a high-profile anti-corruption drive targeting irregularities in the issuance of driving licenses across the state. As part of this crackdown, surprise inspections were conducted by the Vigilance Bureau (VB) at Regional Transport Authority (RTA) offices and driving test centers.

These raids uncovered widespread malpractices, including the issuance of licenses without proper tests, use of fake documents, and bribery involving agents and officials. Consequently, 16 FIRs were registered, and 24 individuals, including agents and government staff, were arrested.

On April 25, three senior officers — Parmar, Swarandeep and Harpreet — were suspended for “grave misconduct and dereliction of duty” under relevant service rules. The suspensions were attributed to their alleged inaction despite available evidence, including delays in arresting two key accused RTO officials (Ravinder Kumar Bansal, RTO Nawanshahr, and Pardeep Singh Dhillon, RTO Mohali), who remained at large. It was also suspected that internal leaks from the VB allowed the accused to evade capture.

Parmar’s suspension, as an IPS officer, required approval from the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), which was granted, and he was directed to receive a charge-sheet by June 23. Additional Director General of Police (ADGP) Praveen Kumar Sinha was assigned additional charge of VB Chief Director.

This action marked the third leadership change at the VB’s helm in just a few months, following the removal of Varinder Kumar in February 2025 and G Nageswara Rao in March 2025, highlighting ongoing instability in the bureau amid the AAP government’s push for accountability.

On May 18 the Punjab government revoked the suspensions of the two PPS officers—Swarandeep and Harpreet —with immediate effect. Orders issued by Additional Chief Secretary (Home) Alok Shekhar directed their reinstatement to their original positions: Swarandeep as AIG Flying Squad, VB, SAS Nagar, and Mander as SSP, VB, Jalandhar.

Crucially, the period of their suspension (from April 25 to May 18, 2025) was treated as “duty period,” entitling them to full pay and allowances as if they had been on active service.

However, Parmar’s suspension was not revoked. In June, following a review, his suspension was extended until August 21 under Rules 3(7) and 3(8) of the All India Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1969.

The revocation for the two junior officers came just weeks after their suspensions, raising questions about the initial probe’s thoroughness. No official explanation was provided by the government for the selective reinstatement, though sources indicated it followed an internal review finding insufficient evidence of misconduct against them.

The revocations drew sharp criticism from opposition parties, who accused the AAP government of inconsistency and political motivations. Leader of Opposition Partap Singh Bajwa questioned the flip-flop. “First, the AAP government suspended senior VB officers claiming a crackdown on corruption. Now, they’re reinstated — same posts, suspension period not even counted. Both decisions can’t be right. Did AAP suspend them to make them fall in line, and now they’ve complied? This isn’t governance. It’s intimidation,” Bajwa said in a post on X.

Senior bureaucrats and police officers also expressed concerns over the decision’s logic, noting the potential undermining of the anti-corruption drive’s credibility. The episode fueled speculation about internal AAP pressures or electoral considerations, especially amid ongoing high-profile VB probes.