Tribune News Service
Chandigarh, September 6
The Punjab and Haryana High Court today put former DGP Sumedh Singh Saini on notice on an application filed by the State of Punjab for revoking the concession of interim anticipatory bail granted to him on account of “blatant and intentional violation of the directions issued by the High Court”.
The Bench, during the course of hearing, was told that the petition initially came up for hearing on August 11 and the orders were reserved the same day. Pronouncing it the next day, the High Court granted interim anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The matter would now come up for hearing on October 7.
Why no contempt action: Mohali court
- A Mohali court issued a show-cause notice to Saini and his two counsels, asking why contempt proceedings not be initiated against them
- Mohali CJM Pamelpreet Grewal Kahal, accepting the plea filed by VB AIG Ashish Kapoor and IO DSP Harvinder Singh, told Saini to file reply by Sept 14
- The VB said Saini and his counsels made a misstatement in court that HC had stayed proceedings of Saini’s remand on Aug 19, stalling the proceedings when he was produced in the court at noon
Appearing for the State, special public prosecutor SS Narula contended that Saini had to appear before the investigating officer within seven days. Instead of joining the investigation, he preferred another application before the High Court. It came up for hearing on August 17. Realising that the court was not inclined to entertain the application, it was dismissed as withdrawn.
Narula added that the Bench, during the course of hearing, categorically asked the counsel if the petitioner had joined the investigation pursuant to the order passed by the court. The petitioner chose to intentionally exhaust the seven-day period during which he was to join the investigation. It was only late in the evening on the seventh day after the Punjab Vigilance Bureau office in Sector 48, Mohali, had closed that the petitioner arrived at 8 pm on August 18.
“The malicious object of the petitioner was only to create evidence of his having gone to join investigation, although he had no intention to join the investigation in letter and spirit,” Narula said.
Appearing before Justice Avneesh Jhingan, he added that the petitioner had fulfilled the formality of coming to the police station and was throwing tantrums.
Taking up the matter, Justice Jhingan asserted an application had been moved by the petitioner, too, pleading that he had joined the investigation. Reliance was placed on the order of a coordinate Bench to submit there was misuse of process of law. “Notice in the applications for the date already fixed in the main petition,” Justice Jhingan concluded. Saini was represented by senior advocate APS Deol with HS Deol.
High Court puts ex-DGP Saini on notice
{$excerpt:n}
