Two months after the death of IPS officer Y Puran Kumar, the Chandigarh Police SIT has informed the DGP that the investigation has exceeded the 60-day period mandated under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, citing the “voluminous” nature of case records as the primary reason for the delay.
Officials confirmed that a formal intimation regarding the extended probe has been sent to the competent authority, the director general of police (DGP) as required under the act.
However, despite the progress noted on the procedural side, the SIT has not yet questioned any of the individuals named by the officer’s family in their FIR, including liquor contractor Praveen Bansal and then Rohtak SP Narender Bijarniya. Both were accused by the family of exerting pressure and allegedly contributing to the circumstances leading to the officer’s death.
The SIT is examining the records from Rohtak police related to FIR No. 0319/2025 — the case registered against the officer’s PSO, Sushil Kumar, a day before Puran Kumar died — which the family has termed “fabricated.”
Under the Rules framed for the SC/ST Act, the investigating officer must complete the investigation within 60 days. If they are unable to complete the investigation within 60 days, the law mandates that the IO must inform the next higher authority in writing, explaining the reasons for the delay. This is a compulsory reporting requirement.
{{/usCountry}}Under the Rules framed for the SC/ST Act, the investigating officer must complete the investigation within 60 days. If they are unable to complete the investigation within 60 days, the law mandates that the IO must inform the next higher authority in writing, explaining the reasons for the delay. This is a compulsory reporting requirement.
{{/usCountry}}The case
52-year-old Y Puran Kumar, a 2001-batch IPS officer of the Haryana cadre, was found dead at his official residence in Chandigarh on October 7, 2025. According to police, he reportedly shot himself with a service revolver; a will and a typed suicide note — later described as running to eight pages — were recovered from the scene.
In his note, Kumar accused multiple senior officers of prolonged mental harassment, public humiliation, caste-based discrimination and systemic bias — claiming these abuses had become unbearable.
His wife — a senior IAS officer — has filed a complaint seeking that an FIR be registered under relevant provisions including the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, alleging that harassment by colleagues drove him to take this extreme step.
The case triggered renewed public and institutional scrutiny over alleged caste-based discrimination within the police force, and a special investigation is underway.
32 witnesses examined
The SIT has examined 32 witnesses so far and recently submitted a status report before the local court, outlining the steps taken in the investigation, police said. The witnesses include police personnel, administrative officials and individuals connected to the events preceding the IPS officer’s death on October 7.