Punjab on Friday assured the Punjab and Haryana High Court that no coercive steps would be taken against Rajya Sabha MP Sandeep Pathak without seeking the court’s prior permission till Monday, when the matter is scheduled to come up again for hearing before Chief Justice Sheel Nagu’s Bench.
The assurance came after the High Court repeatedly questioned the State on whether any FIR had actually been registered against Pathak, while also terming it “a little unimaginable” that the State was unable to clarify the position despite the matter being before the court.
Senior advocate Randeep Rai, appearing for Pathak, argued that newspaper reports had claimed two FIRs were registered against the Rajya Sabha MP after he switched political allegiance. He contended that despite approaching the Director-General of Police, the petitioner was not being informed whether any FIR existed, where it was registered, or under what offences.
During the hearing, Additional Advocate-General Chanchal K Singla submitted that the petition was not-maintainable and could not be entertained. He opposed the petition as “speculative” and based only on newspaper reports, while contending that the petitioner was effectively seeking blanket anticipatory bail without disclosing any offence or FIR particulars.
Singla added information regarding any case registered against the petitioner could only be provided after inquiring from all the districts. “Naturally, we will enquire. We will seek information from all the districts, because he has disclosed nothing," he submitted.
Rai, in turn, countered by saying: “Why should the State want to play hide-and-seek and not tell me if there is an FIR,” Rai contended, adding that the State wanted to keep the element of surprise alive by withholding information on the alleged cases.
The Bench, during the course of hearing, asserted it was a little unimaginable that the State did not know whether an FIR had been lodged. “That’s a little difficult to understand,” the court observed.
The Bench, at one stage, indicated that the petitioner could invoke anticipatory bail jurisdiction following which the State would have to come out with the details. Rai, however, maintained that the immediate concern was disclosure of FIR details.
When the matter turned to interim protection, the State initially opposed any restraint order. But during the exchanges, the State counsel assured the court that no coercive action would be taken without prior intimation till the next date of hearing. The matter was thereafter adjourned to Monday for further proceedings.
Pathak had moved the High Court seeking directions to the Punjab Government and police authorities to disclose details of “two or any other FIRs” allegedly registered against him and to restrain the police from taking coercive action, including arrest, till he was able to avail appropriate legal remedies.
The petitioner also sought directions for “forthwith disclosure/supply of certified copies” of the FIRs allegedly registered by the Punjab Police against the sitting Rajya Sabha member.
The petitioner stated that he was a sitting Rajya Sabha member elected in 2022 with an “established academic and professional background” and was a “law-abiding citizen”. The plea added that the petitioner had “recently exercised his constitutional right to change his political affiliation and merge with another political party”. “Immediately thereafter, the petitioner has been informed, through informal and media sources, about the alleged registration of two or any other FIRs against him by the Punjab Police,” the petition stated.
The petition alleged that despite “diligent efforts”, no details regarding the FIRs, including police stations, FIR numbers, dates, offences invoked or contents of allegations, had been supplied to the petitioner.
