Legal Battles Faced By Punjab Government Under Former Advocate General Gurminder Singh's Tenure

During the 18-month tenure of former Advocate General Gurminder Singh(who recently resigned as the AG), the Punjab government witnessed several significant developments and challenges in the Courtroom. From the farmers' protest to the accusation of abuse of power by ruling party in Elections, Singh played a pivotal role in the state's legal battles. Here is a look back at the legal developments during the former AG's tenure and the challenges that lie ahead.

Elections

One of the most challenging issues for Punjab in recent times was the Panchayat election, during which over 1,200 pleas were filed in the High Court on the grounds of the alleged arbitrary rejection of nomination papers submitted by candidates. The then AG Gurminder Singh represented the State assuring fairness in the democratic process. The High Court initially granted the interim stay on election however, the plea was successfully defended and the stay was vacated. The matter also reached Supreme Court, where it refused to put stay on the Democratic process.

Punjab Government also faced accusations of blatantly misusing the administrative muscle power in order to harm the democratic fabric of Municipal election in the State. It was alleged in the pleas that Punjab Government authorities in connivance with supporter of ruling government destroyed documents/nomination paper of the other party candidate, whereas, administrative officials intertextually facilitated them and police authorities stood mum in order to greet their political affiliations.

Considering the submissions of former AG that a decision has been taken by the State to defer the elections pertaining to certain wards of Patiala and Dharamkot (where incidents were alleged), the Court refused to stay the election.

Issue Of Sub-classification Within Scheduled Castes

 A 7-judge bench of the Supreme Court (by 6-1) held that sub-classification of Scheduled Castes is permissible to grant separate quotas for more backwards within the SC categories.

The arguments were opened by Gurminder Singh, then AG who engaged the bench in socio-legal nuances of the deeply rooted caste system in India. Highlighting the two perspectives on reservations, firstly of those who think they are entitled and secondly, those who are actually in need, Singh expressed that reservation cannot be seen as an act of benevolence. “ Reservation is no benevolence, is not an act of benevolence by the entitled to the needy at all. If at all it is, it is the compensation for centuries of oppression of the needy…”

He submitted that reservation was a tool in the hands of the state to achieve the ultimate goal of equality as enshrined under Article 14 of the Constitution.

Singh weaved the twin effect of reservations as a tool which not only ensures equal opportunities for the disadvantaged to enable equal status but also ensures a life of dignity.

Spotlighting the issue of 'Heredity of Caste', it was argued that caste-based occupations like that of cobblers, sweepers, blacksmiths etc have continued to be handed down to future generations of India. The evil, Singh expressed, lay in the rigid mindset of the society which has chained itself to the notion of caste-influenced fate.

Considering the submissions, the Apex Court opined that States can identify more backwards among the SC categories and can sub-classify them for separate quota within the quota.

Farmers Protest

The issues surrounding farmers and their protests have consistently posed a significant challenge for the Punjab government.

Days before his resignation, then AG informed the Supreme Court that it has cleared the protesting farmers from the Shambhu and Khanauri borders near Haryana, and cleared the National Highway for free traffic movement.

Singh also informed the bench comprising Justice Surya Kant and NK Singh that Jagjit Singh Dallewal, the veteran leader of the protesters, has ended his hunger protest (which started in November last year).

The bench also refused to entertain a contempt petition filed against the Punjab authorities for clearing the protesters in alleged violation of a status quo order passed by the Supreme Court last year. The bench said that it was the Court which has been prodding the Government to open the High Court.

Security Concerns Involving Opening Of CM House Road

The Supreme Court stayed the order passed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court for the opening of the road to Punjab Chief Minister's (CM) house on experimental basis. The road in front of the Punjab CM's residence was blocked for security purposes during the Khalistani terrorism of the 1980s.

"Nobody wants anything untoward to happen", the bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta said while staying the High Court's direction.

The Punjab government challenged the order passed by the High Court, while dealing with suo-matter matters pertaining to traffic woes and infrastructure problems in Chandigarh. Then AG, Gurminder Singh, beseeched the court to stay the High Court's direction. He pointed to the killing of singer Sidhu Moosewala, saying that he was killed 2 days after his security was scaled down. Senior Advocate also referred to a Rocket Propelled Grenade (RPG) attack on the Intelligence headquarters.

After considering the submissions, the court issued notice and stayed High Court direction for opening of the road to the CM's house.

Stubble Burning

Stubble Burning In Punjab was allegedly considered as the main cause for Pollution problems in Delhi-NCR.

In a plea before the Apex Court, hearing the MC Mehta case concerning pollution management in Delhi NCR, focusing on issues related to vehicular pollution, solid waste management, and stubble burning in the NCR states. Singh stressed that for the proposal of crop diversification to be a success, it was crucial that farmers be offered incentives of two kinds :

(1) "There is a Minimum Support Price (MSP) that has to be given and (2) Minimum Assured Procurement - in paddy produce, 100% produce is assured that it will be picked up by the Food Corporation of India- which is why unfortunately the procurement policy is not there" The bench suggested that the incentive proposals be discussed in the CAQM meeting.

Singh added that while the State of Punjab supports the efforts for eradicating stubble burning, other factors within the State of Delhi should be seen which are contributing to a stagnant AQI level since December 2024.

"We have data on AQI of Delhi after 15th November which was the last day the fire incident was reported and thereafter the AQI in Delhi touched 400 and in January it is continuing....we are committed to eradicating stubble burning but how much are we contributing as State, if your lordships can just take a call on that." submitted Singh

Justice Oka replied, "You are right, ultimately we cannot blame one state alone."

Apex Court Delineating Limits Of Gubernatorial Powers

In a significant judgment delineating the limits of the gubernatorial powers, the Supreme Court held that it is not open for a Governor to withhold assent to bills by doubting the validity of the legislative session in which they were passed. Declaring so, the Court held that then Punjab Governor Banwarilal Purohit must proceed to decide on the four bills which have been submitted for his assent.

The Punjab Governor had withheld assent on the bills by doubting the validity of the June session of the Punjab Vidhan Sabha, in which they were passed.

The State Government had filed the plea against the Governor's inaction on four bills, which include money bills, the bench observed in the judgment : "Any attempt to cast doubt on the session of the legislature would be fraught with great perils to democracy. The Speaker, who has been recognised to be the guardian of the privileges of house,was acting in his jurisdiction in adjourning the house sine die. Casting doubt on the validity of the session of the house is not a constitutional option open to the governor. The legislative assembly comprises of duly elected members of legislature".

Sacrilege Case

The 2015 sacrilege case remains one of the most sensitive issues in Punjab, with Dera chief Gurmeet Ram Rahim currently standing trial.

The Supreme Court in October stayed the Punjab and Haryana High Court's order which stayed trial of Ram Rahim in the 2015 cases relating to sacrilege of holy book Shri Guru Granth Sahib.

Punjab government represented by then AG Singh challenged the stay imposed on Ram Rahim's trial by the High Court.

To recap, in 2021, Ram Rahim moved the High Court seeking a fair and impartial investigation into 3 different incidents of sacrilege of Shri Guru Granth Sahib between June to October 2015 in Punjab, for which he was arrayed as an accused by the SIT formed by the Punjab Government. The Dera chief challenged the Punjab Government's notification dated 6 September, 2018 vide which it withdrew its consent to transfer the probe to CBI. The plea also sought directions to CBI to continue with the investigation in the sacrilege cases.

In March, 2024, while referring the petition to a larger bench, to determine if the consent given by the State Government for a CBI probe can be withdrawn later, stayed further proceedings qua Ram Rahim. Against this order, State of Punjab approached the Supreme Court.

During today's hearing, then Punjab Advocate General submitted that the 6 September notification has been held to be good in the eyes of law. The same has been upheld by the Supreme Court as well. Considering the same, the Apex Court stayed High Court's order.

Adverse Remarks Against Punjab Police Expunged 

The High Court expunged remarks made on Punjab Police that “there is definitely lapse of security” clarifying that earlier directions to substitute Punjab Police with a neutral police force (UT Administration/State of Haryana) were issued “wholly and solely keeping in mind the threat perception perceived by the Judge and also this Court” in security breach case.

Former AG representing Punjab Government filed application seeking the recalling of the order whereby the High Courthad directed not to deploy Punjab Police for the security of a sitting High Court judge who exposed "large-scale lapses on the part of investigating agencies" of Punjab and whose security was compromised in a recent incident.

Ravi Beas River Water Tribunal 

 Former AG Singh argued before the Ravi Beas River Water Tribunal to reopen the earlier Report of 1987, which gave grave findings against the State of Punjab.

It is pertinent to note that he is the only Advocate General who has been able to successfully convince the Tribunal about the fallacy of the Report and ensured re-opening of the case for hearing de-novo after a passage of 40 years, thus giving the State of Punjab a chance to address its claim on a larger share in the river waters, which is one of the most important issues affecting the State and its general populace.

Implementation Of New Pairvi System

Addressing issue of over-crowding of courtrooms by Police Officials, the office of then AG implemented the AGCMS (Advocate General's Case Management System). It has case data for about 3 lakh pending and disposed off cases including paper books relating to the State of Punjab, out of which about 60-70% are criminal matters and other matters relating to Punjab Police.

Formulation of proper pairvi forms aims at reducing the footfall of police officials required to attend court proceedings in criminal cases.

Challenges On The Horizon

The recent assault case involving an Army officer presents yet another significant challenge for the Punjab government. The High Court recently reprimanded the government for its failure to arrest the Punjab Police personnel allegedly involved in the assault of the Army officer.

Last week, the Government also received criticism for not streamlining the Jail Security issues. The bench while noting the lack of progress in the measures required to be taken to augment jail security said, "We...are not satisfied with the measures taken by the State Government for strengthening the jail security. Many affidavits have been filed on behalf of the State, but there has been a lack of progress in the areas enumerated..."

Summons were issued to the Punjab's Chief Secretary, Additional Chief Secretary (Finance), and Additional Chief Secretary (Jails), to explain as to why the measures, which were suggested by the Senior Officers of the State Government to streamline the security in jails have not been put in place for over a year.

The fight against drug abuse remains one of the state's most pressing challenges for the Punjab Government. As a border state, Punjab continues to grapple with drugs and smuggling which has had a profound impact on society.

The High Court recently raised concern on the possible misuse of Punjab Police power in anti-drugs drive started off late in Punjab, wherein all SSPs and SHOs will be given quantified targets and based on that, their performance will be assessed.

In January, the High Court flagged an "unexpected surge" in the bail pleas involving heroin, observing that it indicates the state government's failure to curb this menace, especially in the state of Punjab which is a great concern in itself as this drug malady is eating the future of this country like a termite.