Panchkula: Former Haryana principal secretary and 1976-batch IAS officer M.L. Tayal has approached the special CBI court in Panchkula seeking production of documents related to a preliminary inquiry allegedly conducted by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) before registration of the disproportionate assets (DA) case against him.
The court has issued notice to the CBI, seeking its response to Tayal’s application. The matter is scheduled to be heard on September 17, his counsel, advocate D.S. Chawla, said.
Tayal has argued that the records of the preliminary inquiry are material to the fair adjudication of the case and should be produced before the court and supplied to the defence.
DA Case Registered in 2017
According to Tayal’s application, the CBI registered the DA case on September 4, 2017, on the basis of a complaint filed by then CBI official Subhash Chander against Tayal and others, alleging possession of assets disproportionate to their known sources of income.
The application also refers to the earlier investigation into the Manesar land deal, which forms the broader backdrop to the proceedings against Tayal.
The Manesar land deal FIR was initially registered by the Manesar police in August 2015 under provisions relating to cheating, forgery and the Prevention of Corruption Act. The matter was subsequently transferred to the CBI, which registered a fresh case on September 15, 2015.
During the investigation, the CBI conducted searches at several locations, including Tayal’s residence.
Tayal has claimed that the search of his premises conducted on September 3, 2016, did not result in the recovery of any incriminating document or material. He has also questioned the subsequent registration of the DA case, alleging that it was lodged about a year later on the basis of a false complaint.
Tayal Claims Detailed Preliminary Inquiry Was Conducted
A key part of Tayal’s application concerns a preliminary inquiry that he says was conducted by Ram Singh, then ASP, CBI ACB Chandigarh, before registration of the DA FIR.
According to Tayal, the inquiry was intended to ascertain whether a prima facie case existed against him regarding possession of disproportionate assets.
He has claimed that he appeared before the CBI several times between November 2016 and January 2017 and furnished extensive information and documents concerning his financial position.
These included details relating to loans, properties, retirement benefits, vehicles and investments. Tayal also submitted fund-flow statements covering the period from 2002-03 to 2015-16 in respect of himself, his wife Savita Tayal, and M.L. Tayal and Sons (HUF).
The application further states that statements of other witnesses were also recorded during the preliminary inquiry.
Tayal has claimed that he was subsequently informed by Ram Singh that his presence was no longer required and that, based on the documents relating to his income and assets, no incriminating evidence had come on record.
Documents Sought From CBI
Mr Tayal has asked the court to direct the prosecution to produce the complete records connected with the alleged preliminary inquiry and provide copies to him.
Among the documents sought are:
- The order appointing Ram Singh as the inquiry officer.
- Notices issued to various institutions and their replies.
- Documents and financial details submitted by Tayal during the inquiry.
- Case diaries maintained during the inquiry.
- Statements of witnesses recorded during the proceedings.
- The preliminary inquiry report and related records.
Mr Tayal has alleged that the investigating officer deliberately withheld these documents and did not include them in the chargesheet despite their relevance to his defence.
His application argues that the records could have a bearing on the issues involved in the DA case and are therefore necessary for a fair adjudication.
CBI Chargesheet Filed in 2024
The CBI filed its chargesheet against M.L. Tayal, his wife Savita Tayal and their son Kartik Tayal on February 8, 2024, in the disproportionate assets case.
Advocate D.S. Chawla has also informed the court that sanction for prosecution had not been granted against Tayal’s wife, Savita Tayal.
The prosecution case alleges that Tayal and his family members accumulated assets disproportionate to their known sources of income during the period under investigation.
CBI Alleges ₹9 Crore Disproportionate Assets
According to the CBI case, Tayal allegedly possessed disproportionate assets worth approximately ₹9 crore during the period from January 1, 2006, to December 31, 2014.
The agency has alleged that he acquired movable and immovable properties in his own name as well as in the names of family members through corrupt and illegal means by allegedly misusing his official position.
The allegations relate to a period during which Tayal was a senior bureaucrat in Haryana and subsequently held a key post after his retirement from the IAS.
Tayal, however, has been contesting the allegations and has sought access to the preliminary inquiry records as part of his defence.
Who Is M.L. Tayal?
Mr Tayal is a retired 1976-batch IAS officer of the Haryana cadre who held several important administrative positions during his career.
He served as Principal Secretary to then Haryana Chief Minister Bhupinder Singh Hooda from March 6, 2005, to October 31, 2009. During the first tenure of the Hooda government, Tayal was regarded as one of the chief minister’s trusted bureaucratic aides and was involved in several important policy and administrative matters.
Mr Tayal retired from the IAS in October 2009.
Soon after retirement, he was appointed as a Member of the Competition Commission of India (CCI). He served a five-year term from November 30, 2009, to December 31, 2014.
His post-retirement career subsequently came under scrutiny in connection with investigations into the Manesar land matter and the disproportionate assets case.
Family Members Also Named in Case
Tayal’s wife, Savita Tayal, was a government college principal and retired in 2012. She was subsequently appointed as a member of the Haryana Public Service Commission (HPSC) and served until June 2016.
Their son, Kartik Tayal, is a law graduate who later worked as a real estate transaction broker in Gurugram.
Their daughter, Malvika Tayal, is also a law graduate and has practised law in Chandigarh.
Manesar Land Deal Investigation
The DA proceedings are connected to the wider scrutiny surrounding the Manesar land deal case, in which investigative agencies have examined allegations of abuse of official position and irregularities in the release and acquisition of land.
Tayal has been among the officials whose role has come under investigation in the matter. Agencies have alleged that officials misused their positions in connection with the release of land acquired by the state, allegedly benefiting private developers and causing financial losses to landowners.
The Manesar land controversy dates back to transactions and government decisions concerning land acquisition during the 2004-2007 period.
The CBI subsequently investigated the matter, leading to searches and further scrutiny of the assets and financial dealings of persons connected with the case.
ED Probe and Asset Attachment
The legal scrutiny surrounding Tayal and his family has also extended to a money-laundering investigation by the Enforcement Directorate (ED).
As part of the probe linked to the underlying cases, the ED provisionally attached family assets valued at approximately ₹14.06 crore.
The attached assets reportedly included bank balances, two residential houses and seven apartments located across New Delhi, Chandigarh and Gurugram.
The agency’s action formed part of the broader investigation into alleged proceeds of crime arising from the cases linked to the Manesar land matter and related financial irregularities.
Tayal Seeks Records to Strengthen Defence
The latest application before the Panchkula special CBI court focuses specifically on the preliminary inquiry that Tayal says preceded registration of the DA FIR.
His central contention is that the inquiry involved detailed scrutiny of his income, assets, investments, loans and fund flows and that he had supplied documents and appeared before the CBI during the November 2016-January 2017 period.
He now wants the court to direct the CBI to produce those records, arguing that they are relevant to determining how the DA case was initiated and whether the material gathered during the preliminary inquiry supports or contradicts the allegations subsequently made against him.
The CBI has been asked to respond to his plea. The matter will next come up before the special CBI court in Panchkula on September 17, when the court is expected to consider the agency’s response.
