E-Paper
Punjab playing hide and seek: MP Sandeep Pathak to HC
MP’s counsel said despite high court’s directions, the Punjab government was not informing the court whether any criminal case had been registered against the MP
The Punjab and Haryana high court on Friday extended its interim order till May 22 restraining Punjab from taking coercive action against Rajya Sabha member Sandeep Pathak without prior permission of the court as the government failed to apprise whether any criminal case had been registered against the MP.
Senior advocate RS Rai, who appeared for Pathak, accused the government of “playing hide and seek”. He said despite high court’s directions in this regard during previous proceedings, the government was not informing the court whether any criminal case had been registered against the leader.
Pathak is among the seven MPs, who on April 24 left the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) and joined the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in New Delhi. Reports about the registration of two criminal cases against the RS MP appeared in the media in the first week of May but have not been confirmed by the authorities. Pathak approached court on May 8 seeking copies of the purported FIRs.
The state’s counsel raised issue of the petition’s maintainability and argued that supplying the requested information would grant the petitioner the relief they sought. Furthermore, the state expressed serious apprehension that such a precedent would open the “floodgates”, allowing anyone to approach the court with similar petitions.
However, Rai countered by saying that once an FIR existed, a citizen had the right to know. “You are supposed to upload it within 24 hours. Here, you are playing hide and seek,” he said, further adding that there were no answers despite two hearings in this case on May 8 and May 11.
As the government counsel said Pathak can approach the magistrate concerned according to legal provisions and cannot agitate before the high court, Rai responded by questioning which magistrate should the petioner approach in the absence of information about the FIR’s location.
At one point, the court also observed, “I fail to understand what is the hesitation in answering the query as to whether any offence has been registered or not registered.”
To a pointed question from the court whether the counsel has information about the registration of criminal cases, the government counsel replied in negative and submitted that he had “no instructions” and has been told to argue on the maintainability of the petition.
At the end, the court extended interim protection to Pathak and adjourned the matter for May 22 while recording that “the state has sought time to answer query of the court whether any cognisable offence has been registered against the petitioner”. On state’s insistence, the court also recorded Punjab’s objection regarding the maintainability of the petition.
Ensure security for Rajinder Gupta, his family: HC to Punjab
Meanwhile, while hearing petition of Rajya Sabha member Rajinder Gupta, the court also reiterated the directions issued on May 8, asking the Punjab government to ensure security for Gupta and his family. In his plea on May 8, he had challenged the state government decision of withdrawal of his state police security cover. The chairman emeritus of the Trident Group was among seven AAP MPs, who defected to the BJP on April 24. While posting the matter for May 22, the court asked the state government to respond to his plea, wherein he has also levelled allegations of “political vendetta”.
