Chandigarh, January 17
After holding that the corruption case against Punjab’s former DGP S.S. Virk required fresh probe due to “unsatisfactory nature of investigations” earlier carried out, Mr Justice H.S. Bhalla of the Punjab and Haryana High Court today directed the disbanding of the special investigating team constituted for the purpose within seven days.

Pronouncing the orders in an open court on Virk’s plea for the CBI probe into the case, Mr Justice Bhalla also directed the principal secretary, home, to appoint a police office not below SSP’s rank to conduct a “fresh detailed probe”.

The development is significant as 1970-batch IPS-officer Virk can now refer to the court orders for furthering his case for appointment as DGP in his parent state of Maharashtra.

In his detailed order, Mr Justice Bhalla added the investigating officer would be appointed, within 10 days of the team’s disbanding, in consultation with the chief secretary. The investigating officer would to be at liberty to form a fresh team of investigating officers of his choice, if the situation so demands.

The officer would carry out the investigations himself or with the cooperation of other team members. The investigation would be concluded, and final report submitted, to the trial magistrate “at the earliest possible time”. The officer and co-associates, if appointed, “shall not be influenced in any manner by the material already collected by the previous investigating team. They shall act freely, fairly and independently without being influenced from either of the side”.

Mr Justice Bhalla added that the investigating officer would submit report positively to the principal secretary periodically.

Expressing disinclination to handover the case to the CBI, Mr Justice Bhalla ruled: “The first information report registered against the petitioner clearly spells out that it was registered under the Prevention of Corruption Act, and such like routine matters should not be entrusted to the CBI.

“The contention of counsel for the petitioner that the matter is required to be investigated by the CBI, to my mind, is not liable to be accepted, especially when serious accusations have been raised against particular officers of the Punjab police…. If they do not touch the investigations in the present case, the forming of another investigating team by the competent authority would meet the ends of justice and would repose faith in the administration of justice; and the state investigating machinery as well.”

The Bench also took note of a letter written by Virk to union home secretary V.K. Duggal on March 22, 2007, in which he had stated that the Punjab government had deputed a group of police officers to fabricate some case against him and involve him in criminal proceedings.

“The contents of the letter… clearly go to show that the present government was biased against the petitioner and the after formation of the government, the first step taken by them was to prepare a group of officers to involve the petitioner in criminal proceedings. On the basis of the material available on the file, it can be easily inferred that the apprehension in the mind of the petitioner is not without any basis,” the judgment added.

Going into the facts and circumstance leading to fresh probe, Mr Justice Bhalla observed: “It would be desirable to entrust the investigation to another team under the direct supervision of the principal secretary, home, and the department of home affairs and justice, Punjab, so that people may have faith in the administration of justice; and the petitioner may feel assured that new team, which would look into the matter, would lay the final outcome of the investigating in a free and fair manner.”

Justice Bhalla added: “It is a case in which there is need to do fresh investigations because of the unsatisfactory nature of investigation done earlier. Thus, in the case in hand, fresh investigation is required to promote the cause of justice….It is duty of this court to ensure that the government agencies do their duty without any bias, mala fide and strictly in conformity with law.”