Chandigarh: The Punjab and Haryana High Court has initiated suo motu contempt of court proceedings against nine police officers, including four IPS officers and two Haryana Police Service (HPS) officials, over an eight-month delay in registering a First Information Report (FIR) related to a high-profile cheating and fraud case. The court found the delay to be in clear violation of the Supreme Court’s guidelines and statutory provisions.
Officers Involved in Contempt Proceedings
The contempt action targets:
- Rakesh Kumar Arya – Former Commissioner of Police, Panchkula; currently posted as IGP (Crime)
- Sibash Kabiraj – Commissioner of Police, Panchkula
- Himadree Kaushik and Manpreet Singh – Former Deputy Commissioners of Police (DCP), Panchkula
- Vikram Nehra and Surender Singh – ACPs in Panchkula (Haryana Police Service officers)
- Hitender Singh and Kamlajeet Singh – Inspectors in Panchkula police
- Parkash Chand – Sub-Inspector, Economic Offences Wing, Panchkula
Justice Harpreet Kaur Jeewan has directed these officers to file their replies by November 18, 2025.
Background of the Case and Court’s Observations
The case stems from FIR No. 265 dated June 19, 2025, registered at Chandimandir Police Station, Panchkula under Sections 406 (criminal breach of trust) and 420 (cheating) of the Indian Penal Code. The complainant, Malkiat Singh, alleged that after an Enforcement Directorate (ED) raid at his residence on January 23, 2024, an accused individual — purportedly a personal assistant to an MLA — demanded Rs 1 crore to drop the ED proceedings. The money was allegedly handed over in two instalments of Rs 50 lakh at Ambala and Mohali. However, the accused allegedly misappropriated the funds, demanded an additional Rs 8 crore, and threatened the complainant with arrest and harm to his family.
Supreme Court Guidelines Ignored: FIR Registration Delay
The Supreme Court’s landmark judgment in Lalita Kumari vs. State of UP mandates that FIR registration must be prompt and preliminary inquiries should not exceed seven days. The general diary should also document reasons for any delay. However, the FIR in this case was registered on June 19, 2025 — nearly eight months after the complaint was filed on October 23, 2024. The police failed to provide a reasonable explanation for this delay, prompting the court to term the police conduct as “stolid nay recalcitrant.”
Justice Sumeet Goel’s September 1 order dismissed anticipatory bail pleas from the accused and referred the matter to the Chief Justice for contempt proceedings.
Legal Framework and Next Steps
The contempt proceedings have been initiated under Section 2(b) of the Contempt of Court Act, which deals with willful disobedience of court orders or directions. The Chief Justice approved the contempt initiation on September 9 after confirming the officers’ current postings and addresses.
The officers will now have to respond to the court by November 18. The proceedings underscore the judiciary’s stern stance on timely FIR registration and police accountability in sensitive cases.
Significance of the Case
This case highlights ongoing challenges in police accountability and adherence to Supreme Court mandates. The court’s decision to initiate contempt proceedings against senior police officers signals a crackdown on negligence and delays that compromise justice and the rule of law.
Read also: Delhi HC Upholds Procedural Safeguards in PMLA, Limits Arbitrary Use of ED Powers
