Punjab Congress president Warring moves High Court against SC commission notice

According to the plea, the Commission acted in a manner that “defies the principles of natural justice” since the notice came without any underlying material being provided. The petition says, “The petitioner has not been supplied the complaint, documents, statements, recordings or any evidence that may have formed the basis of the impugned notice”, adding that such a process is “contrary to transparency” and creates “serious prejudice”.

Warring has further alleged that the Commission’s action is “politically motivated” and has been taken in “undue haste”. The petition says the notice appears to be “engineered to damage the petitioner’s public standing” and to cause harm in view of his position as president of the Punjab Congress. It states that the timing of the proceedings “speaks for itself”, and claims there is “malice in law” behind the decision to pursue the matter without giving him access to the material being relied upon.

The MP has argued that the Commission cannot initiate such action unless there is a properly supported complaint or clear evidence, and that its powers do not extend to starting an inquiry without fulfilling these basic requirements. The petition states that the Commission has “transgressed the boundaries of its authority” and acted “without following the mandatory procedural safeguards”.

Warring has sought the quashing of the notice and a declaration that any proceeding initiated without furnishing the basic material is invalid. He has also asked the court to direct the Commission to act in accordance with law and to ensure that any inquiry follows a transparent process.

At the brief hearing, Bipan Ghai senior counsel for Warring, accompanied by Nikhil Ghai, told the court there was urgency in the matter. Justice Sehgal did not record the reasons for his recusal but directed the registry to place the matter before another bench after the necessary orders from the Chief Justice.