Punjab & Haryana High Court Strikes Down Vigilance Bureau Charge-Sheet Against Eight HCS Officers
In a significant judicial ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has quashed a charge-sheet filed by the Haryana Vigilance Bureau (VB) in June 2023 against eight Haryana Civil Service (HCS) officers. This decision effectively removes a major legal hurdle that had been blocking the officers' elevation to the prestigious Indian Administrative Service (IAS) cadre under the state's promotion quota.
Court Finds Charge-Sheet Legally Flawed and Illegal
Justice Jasgurpreet Singh Puri, in a meticulously detailed order, observed that the names of the eight officers—Jagdeep Dhanda, Kuldhir Singh, Surinder Singh, Veena Hooda, Jag Niwas, Kamlesh Bhadu, Vatsal Vashisth, and Sarita Malik—were unjustly included in the charge-sheet despite having no substantive connection to the original case. The court emphatically stated that these officers were never formally named as accused in the First Information Report (FIR), nor was any independent investigation ever conducted against them by the authorities.
"This court is satisfied that the presentation of the charge-sheet... was not in accordance with law and is illegal in nature," declared Justice Puri, thereby setting aside the June 30, 2023, charge-sheet that had been filed under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). This ruling underscores a critical judicial check on procedural overreach by investigative agencies.
Background: A Long-Standing Recruitment Controversy
The origins of this legal saga trace back to the recruitment process for the 2001 batch conducted by the Haryana Public Service Commission (HPSC). This process was challenged in 2002 over allegations of nepotism and irregularities; however, that writ petition remains pending before the courts to this day, highlighting the protracted nature of the dispute.
In a separate but related development, a 2005 FIR was registered concerning the recruitment of assistant professors. Crucially, this FIR also failed to establish any link or wrongdoing by the HCS officers in question, further weakening the Vigilance Bureau's subsequent actions against them.
Allegations of Mala Fide Intent and Political Interference
During the court proceedings, senior advocates Gurminder Singh and Inder Pal Goyat, representing the officers, argued forcefully that the 2023 charge-sheet was filed with mala fide intent. They contended that its primary purpose was to deliberately jeopardize the officers' pending IAS nominations, which the state government had formally sent to the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) in July 2022 for approval.
Adding weight to this argument, the state government itself conceded during the hearing that the FIR pertained specifically to the recruitment of assistant professors. The government acknowledged that the petitioners were not named in the original FIR and that no independent investigation had been conducted against them, effectively undermining the Vigilance Bureau's case.
Implications: A Clear Path for IAS Promotion
With the charge-sheet now quashed, the legal cloud over the eight HCS officers has been lifted. This ruling clears the administrative and legal path for their anticipated elevation to the IAS cadre, a career milestone that had been stalled by the Vigilance Bureau's actions. The decision reinforces the principle that charge-sheets must be based on concrete evidence and proper legal procedure, not on tangential connections or alleged ulterior motives.
The case highlights ongoing tensions between state administrative promotions and vigilance oversight, setting a precedent for how similar disputes might be adjudicated in the future. It also raises questions about the timing and motivations behind the filing of charge-sheets, especially when they coincide with critical career advancements for public servants.
