Punjab and Haryana High Court quashes order declaring IPS officer Dheeraj Kumar Setia PO

Chandigarh, April 19

Just about two months after IPS officer Dheeraj Kumar Setia was declared a proclaimed offender (PO) in a corruption case, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has quashed the order, while confirming interim anticipatory bail to him.

The state’s stand in the matter was that the allegations were serious. “The investigation, which started for theft of Rs 50 lakh unfolded the theft of more than Rs 30 crore and gold” and the petitioner-IPS officer was named by a co-accused.

Justice Avneesh Jhingan, in a previous order, had observed the petitioner was nominated on the basis of a disclosure statement. The special task force went to his office on December 3, 2021, with notice under the provisions of the CrPC for appearance on December 6, 2021. The petitioner was on leave, but sent a request through WhatsApp for extending the time. His arrest warrants were issued by the court on December 16, 2021.

Justice Jhingan asserted that it was an undisputed fact that the petitioner’s request for the extension of time for appearance in the pursuance of the notice was dealt with by seeking arrest warrants. No delay was attributable to him in availing his remedies.

Justice Jhingan observed that the petitioner was, in fact, pursuing his statutory remedies and was holding a senior post in disciplinary force for 17 years. It was not being disputed that he was having an unblemished service record.

Setia had moved the High Court through senior advocate Vinod Ghai with Manjeet Singh, Shreeyash Uday Lalit, Kanika Ahuja and Edward Augustine George. The state was represented by Assistant Advocate-General Dimple Jain. Justice Jhingan added that the petitioner’s name surfaced in the disclosure statement and its evidentiary value would be the subject matter of trial. The role attributed to the petitioner was that he received illegal gratification for helping accused, which he later partially returned.

“The petitioner is a high-ranking police official in the state of Haryana, there is no apprehension of his absconding or fleeing from justice. Prima facie, no case is made out of custodial interrogation. Even if petitioner is clothed with protection of pre-arrest bail, balance can be struck between fair investigation and personal liberty of the petitioner,” the Bench had added.

Figures in disclosure statement

The petitioner’s name surfaced in the disclosure statement and its evidentiary value would be the subject matter of trial. The role attributed to the petitioner was that he received illegal gratification for helping the accused, which he later partially returned. Justice Avneesh Jhingan, Punjab & Haryana HC