E-Paper
Punjab: CBI court denies second bail plea of advocate Slawan in ₹30L graft case
Special judge Bhawna Jain observed that the allegations were serious and that the possibility of the accused influencing witnesses could not be ruled out
Prefer HTon Google
The Special CBI Court in Chandigarh has dismissed the second regular bail application of advocate Jatin Salwan, 70, who is accused of demanding ₹30 lakh to allegedly secure a favourable order in a divorce case by claiming influence over a judicial officer.
Special judge Bhawna Jain observed that the allegations were serious and that the possibility of the accused influencing witnesses could not be ruled out. The court noted that two witnesses linked to the recovery of the alleged bribe money and the CBI trap operation were yet to be examined.
According to the CBI, a complaint was filed by Harsimranjit Singh, who was acting as the power of attorney holder for his sister, Sandeep Kaur, alleging that Salwan demanded ₹30 lakh in exchange for arranging a favourable order in her divorce case through a judicial officer posted in Bathinda.
The CBI registered the case on August 14, 2025, under Section 7-A of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 61(2) (criminal conspiracy) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. The agency alleged that during a trap operation the same day, co-accused Satnam Singh accepted ₹4 lakh as part payment of the demanded amount. Salwan was arrested subsequently and has remained in custody since then.
Opposing the bail plea, the CBI argued that recorded conversations during the verification and trap proceedings prima facie supported the allegations of a bribe demand and collection of part of the amount. It also contended that the alleged offence affected public confidence in the judicial system.
Salwan’s counsel, however, argued that he only quoted his professional fee for handling the divorce case and had been falsely implicated. The defence also cited his age, heart ailment, prolonged custody and the completion of the investigation, arguing that he was no longer required for custodial interrogation.
The court observed that, the defence claim that the money was professional fees, rather than a bribe, would have to be examined during the trial. It also held that the accused’s age and period of incarceration could not be considered in isolation while deciding the bail application.
The court further clarified that an earlier Punjab and Haryana high court order, which permitted Salwan to apply for bail afresh after the complainant and the victim were examined, did not guarantee that his subsequent plea would be allowed.
The CBI has filed the chargesheet and charges have been framed in the case. Three of the 18 prosecution witnesses cited in the chargesheet have been examined so far, the order stated.
The court dismissed the bail application, holding that there had been no substantial change in circumstances since the earlier bail pleas were rejected. The allegations remain subject to adjudication during the trial.
