Supreme Court Issues Notice On Bail Plea Of Former Punjab Minister Bikram Singh Majithia In Disproportionate Assets Case

by Rachel Morgan News Editor

The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a challenge to the Punjab and Haryana High Court’s decision to deny bail to Shiromani Akali Dal leader Bikram Singh Majithia. Majithia is facing allegations of accumulating assets disproportionate to his known income.

High Court Ruling and Appeal

Justices Vikram Nath and NV Anjaria of the Supreme Court issued notice on Majithia’s petition, scheduling a hearing for January 19. The High Court had previously rejected Majithia’s request for regular bail in a case filed by the Punjab Vigilance Bureau under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The court also denied a request for interim bail.

Did You Know? The allegations against Majithia relate to his time as a Member of the Legislative Assembly and Cabinet Minister in Punjab between 2007 and 2017.

Senior Advocate Dr. S. Muralidhar, representing Majithia, argued that the current corruption case relies on the same financial transactions used in a previous NDPS (Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances) case, in which Majithia had already been granted bail. The Supreme Court had dismissed a challenge from the State of Punjab seeking to cancel that bail in April 2025.

Concerns Raised About Investigation

Dr. Muralidhar further contended that the trial court initially cited an incomplete chargesheet as a reason for denying bail, but a chargesheet – comprising approximately 40,000 pages with 272 witnesses – was filed just four days later. He argued this timing was “unfair,” suggesting the investigation against others was already complete.

The High Court, however, maintained that a second FIR was permissible given the potential for a larger conspiracy or distinct offenses. It also cited precedent regarding economic offenses and their impact on bail considerations.

Expert Insight: The High Court’s decision to deny bail underscores the judiciary’s increasing scrutiny of alleged financial crimes, particularly those involving prominent political figures. The court clearly weighed the potential for obstruction of justice and influence over witnesses as key factors.

The High Court directed the investigating agency to conclude its remaining investigation within three months, after which Majithia could again petition for bail.

What’s Next?

The Supreme Court’s decision on January 19 could potentially overturn the High Court’s ruling and grant Majithia bail. Alternatively, the Court may uphold the High Court’s decision, keeping Majithia in custody while the investigation concludes. It is also possible the Court could request further information from either party before making a final determination.

Frequently Asked Questions

What charges does Bikram Singh Majithia face?

Majithia is facing charges under Sections 13(1)(b) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, related to allegations of accumulating assets worth over ₹540 crore disproportionate to his known sources of income.

What was the basis of the High Court’s decision to deny bail?

The High Court cited concerns about Majithia potentially influencing the ongoing investigation, tampering with evidence, and influencing witnesses, given his position as a prominent political figure and former Cabinet Minister.

What is Majithia’s argument against the corruption case?

Majithia argues that the corruption case is based on the same financial transactions that were already considered in a previous NDPS case, in which he was granted bail, and that the State is misusing the criminal process.

As the case moves forward, will the Supreme Court prioritize the concerns of potential obstruction of justice or the arguments regarding the reuse of evidence in a separate case?

You may also like

Leave a Comment