Sidhu plays his hand, moves HC against VB

Referring to news reports in various newspapers, Sidhu submitted that a perusal leaves no manner of doubt that the investigations were conducted in a most high-handed manner, throwing to wind all procedural requirements as well as his Constitutional Rights.

It has been submitted that according to the law applicable to investigation of criminal offences under the Code of Criminal Procedure, all material collected by the investigating agency during the course of their investigations, has to be strictly confidential.

Witness statements recorded by the investigating agency as well as documents seized by them can only be permitted to be used in the inquiry or in the trial. However, in this case, he said premature and unauthorised disclosure has clearly been made with the intention to cause prejudice to his reputation. The disclosure is not only violative of the mandatory provisions of section 162 and 172 but is clearly against the interpretation of these sections by the Supreme Court as well as an express prohibition contained in a number of decisions against premature and unauthorised disclosures.

He submitted that the conduct of the investigating agency and the respondents herein constitute willful disobedience of the law as contained in the statute as well as wanton disregard of the law declared by the Supreme Court on the subject. He submitted that the respondents have rendered themselves liable for having committed criminal contempt of Supreme Court orders, by intentionally and willfully flouting the law declared by it.

He added that since Article 21 of the Constitution guarantees the petitioner a fair trial, the respondents cannot be permitted to cause irreparable damage to his reputation and esteem by making premature and unauthorised disclosure of the material even before the trial has begun.