The Punjab and Haryana High Court has significantly modified its previous stringent directives concerning investigations into organized crime cases across the two states. In a pivotal ruling, the court has relaxed the mandatory requirement for senior police officers to exclusively handle such probes, acknowledging the practical challenges faced by law enforcement agencies.
Revised Investigation Protocol
As per the modified directions issued by a division bench headed by Justice Harpreet Singh Brar, investigations in organized crime cases may now be conducted by an officer of the rank of inspector or higher. However, a crucial safeguard has been introduced: all such investigations must be closely monitored by an officer of the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) or a higher-ranking officer. This balanced approach aims to maintain investigative quality while addressing resource constraints.
States Cite Practical Difficulties
The court's decision came in response to applications filed by both Haryana and Punjab governments, seeking modification of directions issued through a judgment dated May 21, 2025. Both states presented compelling arguments about the impracticality of the original requirements.
Haryana's Submission: The Haryana government informed the court that while most directions had been complied with, enforcing DSP-level investigations in every organized crime case was not feasible due to limited availability of such senior officers. The state revealed that its Special Task Force (STF) has been operational since 2017, with field units strategically deployed in districts where organized crime is more prevalent, particularly those bordering Delhi.
Additionally, Haryana highlighted that beyond the nine STF units, 86 Criminal Investigation Agency (CIA) units were operational across the state, further supported by dedicated cyber cells. The state assured the court that collectively, these resources and personnel were fully capable of dealing with organized criminal activities effectively.
Punjab's Concerns: Similarly, Punjab submitted that there was an acute shortage of DSP-rank officers, making the original directive unsustainable. The state informed that its Anti-Gangster Task Force (AGTF), notified in April 2025, was already functioning under the supervision of a senior officer at the state level.
The Punjab government argued that creating district-wise AGTF units would strain existing resources unnecessarily. Interestingly, the state also revealed that a proposal for establishing a state AGTF police station at Rajpura had already been sent to the additional chief secretary (home) on July 29, 2025, and was currently pending consideration.
Court's Rationale and Observations
Accepting these submissions, the court ruled that investigations in organized crime cases might now be conducted by inspectors or above-rank officers, provided they operated under DSP supervision. The bench further held that both states could decide on establishing district-wise STF and AGTF units based on available resources and the actual prevalence of organized crime in specific regions.
The court made several significant observations during its ruling:
- A uniform structure for task forces might not be necessary in areas where organized crime is not widespread
- Investigation quality would not suffer merely because an inspector conducts the probe under proper senior supervision
- States should consider regional variations in organized crime prevalence when establishing specialized units
Key Modified Directions
The court's modified directives can be summarized as follows:
- Investigations in organized crime cases may be conducted by officers of inspector rank or higher
- All such investigations must be monitored by a DSP or higher-ranking officer
- Both Punjab and Haryana may decide on establishing district-wise AGTF and STF units respectively, based on available resources and personnel
- States will consider the prevalence of organized crime in specific regions when setting up specialized task force units
This landmark modification represents a pragmatic approach to law enforcement challenges, balancing the need for effective organized crime investigation with the practical realities of police resource management in both states. The ruling acknowledges that while maintaining investigative standards is crucial, flexibility is equally important for operational efficiency in combating organized criminal networks.
