2015 Sacrilege Cases: High Court Frames 4 Questions For Larger Bench On Ram Rahim's Plea Challenging Punjab's Withdrawal Of Consent For CBI Probe

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has framed four questions while referring Dera Sacha Sauda chief Gurmeet Ram Rahim's plea challenging Punjab Government's withdrawal of consent for CBI probe into 2015 Sacrilege Cases, in which he is an accused. The plea had also sought directions to CBI to continue with the investigation in the Sacrilege cases.Justice Vinod S. Bhardwaj in a detailed order released today, has framed four questions for consideration of the larger bench and "to balance the equities", stayed further trial court proceeding.The matter was referred citing divergence of opinion between two different single Benches of the High Court as regards the validity and sanctity of the Notification as well as the enforceability of the resolution passed by the Punjab Vidhan Sabha to withdraw the investigation from the CBI.Following are the questions framed by the Court to be answered by the larger bench:i) Whether the Legislative Assembly of a State is competent to issue directions to the State Executive, by passing a resolution, for carrying out investigation in a criminal case through or by any specific agency and as to whether exercise of such a jurisdiction would amount to steering of an investigation?ii) Whether it is open to the High Court to re-examine the question of law kept open by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, while dismissing a Special Leave Petition, in a subsequent petition instituted by another accused before the High Court ?iii) Whether the State is competent and empowered to withdraw its Notification transferring investigation to the CBI, after registration of a regular case by the CBI or whether final report in such registered cases can only be submitted by the Central Bureau of Investigation? iv) Whether principle of 'sub-silentio' would be applicable when the Notification of withdrawal has been upheld by this Court, in another petition filed by other accused, aggrieved of same Notification or whether it operates as a binding precedent for all accused?In 2021, Ram Rahim moved High Court seeking a fair and impartial investigation in three different incidents of sacrilege of Shri Guru Granth Sahib between June to October 2015 in Punjab, wherein he is arrayed as an accused by SIT formed by the Punjab Government.The Dera chief has challenged the Punjab Government's notification wherein it withdrew its consent to transfer the probe to CBI. The plea also sought directions to CBI to continue with the investigation in the Sacrilege cases.The Senior counsel for Ram Rahim argued that Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution mandate a right to fair investigation and that the same has been blatantly violated in the present case. The act of withdrawal of the Notification was propelled by political considerations and under pressure of the religious hardliners. A malafide exercise of the power with dominant object to implicate the petitioner and depriving him of his social life by injuring his reputation, purely for paving a way for political gain ought not to be protected or promoted, she added.Whereas, the counsel for the state contended that petition is liable to be dismissed since the issues have already been decided by this Court vide a detailed order passed in Charanjit Singh and others Versus State of Punjab and others, [CWP-23285 of 2018], wherein the Court opined that there was "no infirmity" in Punjab's Government to withdraw consent for CBI probe.It is argued that the Notification has already been upheld, there is no occasion or reason for revisiting the said proposition as it would amount to a review of a judgment.The State also informed that the two Letter Patents Appeals filed against the judgement were also dismissed.Another petition was filed titled as Sukhwinder Singh @ Sunny Versus State of Punjab and another before the High Court challenging the impugned notification which was also dismissed vide judgment dated 04.01.2021 by placing reliance on Charanjit Singh's case [supra], the state submitted. After examining the submissions, the Court noted that, Supreme Court has repeatedly held that "once an investigation has been entrusted to the CBI and it has registered a regular case thereon, the final report is to be filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation only."Doctrine Of Separation Of Powers, A Basic Structure Of ConstitutionThe Court noted that the doctrine of separation of powers is recognized as a basic structure of the Constitution of India and the State legislative has to legislate on the subjects under its frame. The doctrine mandates that same person should not form more than one organ of the State and should not exercise the function of other organ of the State. While passing a resolution, by the Legislative Assembly, it has to be seen as to whether the same is within the competence of the State legislature as per the power conferred upon it by the Constitution, added the Court.Justice Bhardwaj further highlighted that an assembly route can not be adopted to do what the competent ...

2015 Sacrilege Cases: High Court Frames 4 Questions For Larger Bench On Ram Rahim's Plea Challenging Punjab's Withdrawal Of Consent For CBI Probe

Aiman J. Chishti

Tags