HC raps state over selective action in graft, drug case; orders NCB probe

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has flagged discrepancies in a police probe where a police official accused of accepting a bribe was not charged with corruption, while a complainant and her husband were not booked under the NDPS Act despite their clear admissions of possessing contraband. Taking strong exception to this, the court has referred the case to the Narcotics Control Bureau’s (NCB) Chandigarh Zonal Unit for further investigation.

Serious offence

Advertisement

If there was actual recovery of ganja and bribe was accepted, it was a serious offence... The respondent has saved its officer.

— Justice Bansal

The case originates from a woman's complaint alleging that the petitioner-police official and his team raided her house on December 17, 2020, and recovered 10 kg of ganja. She claimed the officer demanded Rs 20 lakh to settle the case, ultimately agreeing to Rs 16 lakh. She allegedly paid Rs 13 lakh through a mediator the same day, with the balance to be paid later. However, when she tried to expose the officer, he got wind of her plan and did not return to collect the remaining sum.

Justice Bansal, in his order, said: “The payment as well as acceptance of bribe is a crime punishable under the Prevention of Corruption Act. Possessing 10 kg ganja is a punishable offence under the NDPS Act. The respondent — state of Haryana neither registered an FIR under the PC Act nor under the NDPS Act.”

The Bench observed that while the state initiated an inquiry against the police official, no proceedings were launched against the complainant and her family.

“If there was actual recovery of ganja and bribe was accepted, it was a serious offence on the part of the petitioner and his team members. The respondent has saved its officer. In view of the admission of the offence punishable under the NDPS Act, an FIR was bound to be registered,” Justice Bansal said.

While setting aside the departmental penalty of increment stoppage against the police officer, Justice Bansal remarked that the authorities had “miserably failed” in their quasi-judicial duties and remanded the matter to the appellate authority for reconsideration.

Highlighting other gaps in the investigation, the court noted: “There were four-five police officials in the alleged raiding party. There is nothing on record regarding action against the others.”

The judge added that if the police officer was indeed innocent, and neither the ganja nor the cash was recovered, then he had been unnecessarily embarrassed by the “disgruntled family.”

Finding the state’s response inadequate, the high court deemed it appropriate to refer the matter to the Additional Director, NCB, Chandigarh Zonal Unit, for an independent examination of both the alleged recovery of 10 kg ganja and the Rs 13 lakh bribe transaction.