Ropar, April 9
Special Judge G.S. Saran here today took strong notice of the absence of Punjab Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal and his MP-son Sukhbir Singh Badal from hearing of the disproportionate assets case on March 13, Badal, his wife, son, and other accused in the case, registered and investigated by the Punjab Vigilance Bureau (VB), were chargesheeted under various sections of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code. The judge had fixed April 9 and April 10 to allow the prosecution to present its witnesses for recording their statements.

Today, when the hearing started, the judge asked about whereabouts of the Badals. When the defence counsel sought exemption for Badal his son from personal appearance in the court, stating that since Badal was also the Chief Minister, he had certain important engagements, the judge rejected the argument, pointing out the court was also important.

The court has already granted exemption to Badal’s wife Surinder Kaur Badal from personal appearance. Surprisingly, Ropar district attorney Pardeep Mehta, who has been following a pro-defence line despite being responsible for leading the prosecution charge, too sided with the request of Badal’s counsel for the grant of exemption. He told the court that as per Prevention of Corruption Act, presence of the accused during the recording of the evidence of witnesses was not mandatory. To this, the judge pointed out that apart from the Prevention of Corruption Act, the accused also stood chargesheeted under various sections of the IPC.

Thereafter, the counsel told the court that the Chief Minister had gone to New Delhi to attend the conference of Chief Ministers and chief justices on fast track justice while Sukhbir Badal was in Uttar Pradesh campaigning for poll.

Assuring the court that the Badals would be present in court in future, the lawyers requested it to grant them exemption from tomorrow’s hearing, which the judge granted. However, special judge Saran conveyed his strong displeasure over the accused repeatedly seeking exemptions form personal appearance. Later, district attorney Pardeep Mehta presented Vigilance Bureau constable Tarsem Masih as prosecution witness but the court refused to record his statement and asked him to be present tomorrow.