Observing that the relief sought was not practical to grant at this stage, the Special Judge, CBI Court, Chandigarh, disposed of an application filed by the CBI under Section 4 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, seeking expeditious commencement and day-to-day trial in the corruption case registered against suspended Punjab Police DIG Harcharan Singh Bhullar and his associate, Kirshanu Sharda.
The court, in the order, said, “A perusal of the file suggests that the court has been regulating the proceedings to avoid delay in view of the fact that the accused are in custody by fixing the tight schedule, but to insist upon a day-to-day schedule at this stage by the prosecution is impracticable. Provisions of section 4 of the PC Act primarily concern the conduct of trial after cognizance and particularly, after commencement of the evidence. Formal directions for day-to-day trial, if any, may be given after framing of the charge and at the commencement of the prosecution’s evidence. At this stage, the court is of the view that the relief as sought by virtue of the instant application is not practical to be allowed.”
The CBI in the application said that after completion of the investigation, a charge sheet was filed in the case on December 3, 2025, and the cognisance of the offences was taken by the court vide order dated March 13, 2026.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court, while declining the bail application of accused Bhullar, observed that the case was at a nascent stage and that material witnesses, including the complainant and the shadow witness, were yet to be examined. The Court further noted that there existed a reasonable apprehension of the accused influencing the witnesses.
The Supreme Court also dismissed Bhullar’s bail application vide order dated April 10, 2026, while observing that in the event the trial does not commence within a period of two months, the accused would be at liberty to approach the High Court again for appropriate relief.
These judicial observations underscore the necessity for expeditious commencement and progression of the trial in the present case in terms of Section 4 of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Senior Advocate Sartej Singh Narula, along with Advocate S.P.S. Bhullar, appearing for accused Harcharan Singh Bhullar, opposed the application. They argued that the plea was frivolous and amounted to an attempt by the CBI to keep the accused in prolonged and indefinite incarceration.
After hearing the arguments, the Court disposed of the application, observing that at this stage the relief sought therein was not practical to grant.
The CBI had registered the case on October 16, 2025, on the basis of a complaint dated October 11, 2025, made by one Akash Batta. Both the accused were allegedly arrested while demanding and accepting a bribe of Rs 5 lakh.
