High Court adjourns plea seeking CBI probe into IPS officer Y Puran Kumar’s death

During the hearing, the bench posed a series of pointed questions. “What are the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court for a CBI probe?” the Chief Justice asked, to which the counsel sought time to respond. Chief Justice Nagu then remarked, “Why did you start arguments when you are not ready?” before asking, “How do we decide that the case is fit for transfer?” The counsel again requested additional time, prompting the court to adjourn the case.

The counsel representing the Union Territory (UT) of Chandigarh opposed the plea, submitting that a Special Investigation Team (SIT) has already been set up to probe the incident. He pointed out that the First Information Report was registered on October 9, two days after the incident, and the PIL was filed on October 13.

The UT counsel argued that the petitioner, Navneet Kumar of Ludhiana, had no personal connection to the matter and approached the court merely after reading newspaper reports. “There is no allegation of bias or political interference,” he said, questioning the maintainability of the petition.

What the PIL seeks

The PIL, filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, seeks a CBI probe into the alleged suicide of Kumar, a Haryana-cadre IPS officer found dead on October 7 at his official residence in Chandigarh with a gunshot wound to the head. Multiple suicide notes were reportedly recovered, including one dated September 7, allegedly naming eight IPS officers and two IAS officers as responsible for his mental distress and alleging abetment, caste-based harassment, and conspiracy.

The petitioner, a 43-year-old NGO president, claims that the Chandigarh Police investigation is compromised due to institutional overlap, as the deceased served under the Haryana government while the UT administration has ties with both Haryana and central establishments. The plea contends that Kumar had repeatedly raised concerns of workplace harassment and caste-based discrimination, but no corrective action was taken.

The PIL also notes that Kumar’s wife, a senior IAS officer, was on an official tour to Japan at the time. It argues that the case raises larger questions about workplace stress and accountability in the civil services and warns that a superficial probe could erode public confidence.

The petitioner had earlier written to the UT home secretary on October 9, seeking a CBI probe, but received no response. The four respondents named in the case are: the UT administration through its home secretary, the UT senior superintendent of police, the CBI through its director, and the State of Haryana through its chief secretary.

Citing Supreme Court rulings such as State of West Bengal vs Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights (2010), the petition asserts that the high court has the authority to order a CBI investigation in cases of suspected foul play or institutional failure.

The key prayers include a direction to transfer the probe to the CBI, restrain Chandigarh Police from continuing its investigation, preserve all electronic and documentary evidence, and ensure an independent and transparent inquiry.

From the homepage

India responds to Trump’s claim on Russian oil: No conversation between PM Modi and US President yesterday

Kapil Sharma’s cafe attacked for the third time in Surrey

Assam Police to head to Singapore over Zubeen’s death probe