The Punjab and Haryana High Court has questioned how Punjab Finance Minister Harpal Singh Cheema could be implicated in the case concerning the death of Gulzar Singh, a Scheduled Caste daily wager in Sangrur, who had allegedly named the Minister in a video statement recorded shortly before his death.

The question arose during the hearing of a Public Interest Litigation seeking transfer of the investigation into Singh's death to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) or any other independent agency outside the State.

The counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that Cheema had not been arrayed as an accused despite Singh allegedly naming him in the video statement in connection with the drug menace.

The Division Bench of Chief Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Rohit Kapoor however orally questioned how the Minister could be implicated.

The Court further said that “it will not issue notice in this matter” and directed the State to file a status report and “to ensure that a proper investigation is carried out.”

The petition arises out of FIR registered at District Sangrur, under Section 108 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Section 306 of the erstwhile Indian Penal Code, 1860) read with Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

According to the petition, Gulzar Singh had raised concerns over the availability of synthetic drugs, commonly referred to as "chitta", in his locality. He had also questioned State authorities about the source of the drugs and the steps being taken to curb the menace.

Shortly before his death, Gulzar Singh allegedly recorded a video statement in which he attributed responsibility for his death to, among others, Cheema and certain local political representatives.

The petitioner contended that although FIR No. 204 names five accused, the allegations contained in Gulzar Singh's video statement, including the reference to a person holding high political office, had neither been incorporated into the investigation nor properly examined.

It was argued that this omission gave rise to a reasonable apprehension that the investigation would not inspire confidence if it continued under the administrative control of the State Government.

Appearance: Chanchal K Singla Sr. Adv Additional AG Punjab with Ferry Sofat Additional AG Punjab

Title: Ravinder Singh v State of Punjab