High Court to hear Bikram Majithia’s plea against ‘illegal arrest and remand’ on July 4

The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Thursday fixed July 4 for hearing a petition filed by Shiromani Akali Dal leader and former cabinet minister Bikram Singh Majithia against his “illegal arrest and subsequent remand” days after the Vigilance Bureau registered an FIR under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

The hearing was adjourned for a day to enable his counsel to place before Justice Tribhuvan Dahiya’s Bench fresh remand orders issued in the case.

Majithia, among other things, had challenged the initial remand orders after terming it as illegal. His remand on Wednesday was extended by four days.

Among other things, Majithia submitted in his petition that the FIR was a result of “political witch-hunting and vendetta initiated by the present political dispensation with the sole object of maligning and harassing him as he has been a vocal critic and political opponent”.

The petition was filed through Sartej Singh Narula, Damanbir Singh Sobti and Arshdeep Singh Cheema.

Majithia submitted that the FIR dated June 25 at Vigilance Bureau police station in Mohali was “patently illegal” and his arrest the same day from his residence was carried out in “gross violation of settled legal procedures”.

The SAD leader added he was kept in illegal custody for over two hours prior to his official arrest at 11:20 am as evident from multiple video recordings and the remand order passed the next day.

“This custodial detention from 9:00 am to 11:20 am was not only illegal and arbitrary but also in direct contravention of the constitutional and statutory requirement of producing the arrestee before a Magistrate within 24 hours, as enshrined under Article 22(2) of the Constitution and Section 187 of the BNSS,” the petition read.

He added that the remand application filed by the investigating agency “lacked concrete or urgent investigative ground and merely relied on broad, speculative allegations such as the petitioner’s alleged influence, foreign connections, and general statements about the need to confront him with documents or digital devices”.

He further added the assertions clearly reflected a motive to extract a confession or admission from him in violation of the protections guaranteed under Article 20(3) of the Constitution.

Besides this, the order dated June 26 passed by a Judicial Magistrate First Class granting remand till July 2 was “manifestly perverse” and non-speaking.

“It suffers from gross procedural irregularities, particularly non-compliance with the binding Rules and Orders of the Punjab and Haryana High Court…. The magistrate failed to record mandatory satisfaction as required under the rules, including examining case diaries, recording reasons for police custody, and ascertaining the existence of specific investigative,” he submitted.

The petition said there was not even a “whisper” in the order to suggest that a magistrate applied his judicial mind or considered the prior orders of the Supreme Court placed before him, especially when custodial interrogation on the same facts had already been declined.

Going into the details, the petition said the Apex Court vide detailed order dated March 4 had refused the petitioner’s custodial interrogation “despite the same allegation being pressed before it via multiple affidavits filed by the state of Punjab”.

The Supreme Court, instead, directed him corporate with the SIT and join investigation, which was fully complied with.

“Despite the petitioner’s corporation and the Apex Court findings, the State has once again resorted to seeking police custody by concealing material facts and misrepresenting urgency before the magistrate,” it said.

The petition added the abuse of process, the non-application of judicial mind, the stark disregard of binding judicial precedent and procedural safeguards not only vitiated the remand order, but also constituted a gross violation of the petitioner’s fundamental rights under Articles 14, 20, and 21 of the Constitution.

“The present petition, therefore, raises important questions of law and principle concerning abuse of criminal process, misuse of remand powers, and the right to fair investigation and liberty. The petitioner respectfully prays for appropriate reliefs, including quashing of the illegal remand order and appropriate directions to prevent further abuse of process,” it read.

Punjab