Punjab & Haryana High Court Dismisses PIL As Withdrawn After Discovering Plea Was Filed By Absconder In Cheating Case

The Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) as withdrawn after it came to light that the petitioner was an absconder in a cheating case.

The PIL was filed seeking a CBI inquiry into the purchase of 144 Toyota Hilux vehicles by the Punjab Government, alleging embezzlement of government funds and the acquisition of funds through illegal means for the personal benefit of the concerned officer.

During the hearing, Advocate General Maninderjit Singh Bedi appearing for the Punjab Government, submitted that as per the Public Interest Litigation Rules, 2010 (Rules), the petitioner must disclose their credentials before filing the PIL, and the registry is entitled to verify the antecedents.

Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sanjiv Berry said, "learned counsel for the petitioner, after arguing for a while, when confronted with the objections raised by the Registry and the other side, regarding maintainability of the petition and the fact that the petitioner being absconder (though not proclaimed) in an offence of cheating, seeks and is permitted to withdraw this petition."

It is pertinent to note that, as per the Rules No Public Interest Litigation shall be entertained by the Registry unless the petitioner has specifically disclosed his credentials and his direct or indirect personal motive or interest involved in the case, if any, by way of an affidavit.

Petitioner Satnam Singh Dhawan alleged that he found that the price at which the Punjab Government had purchased the aforesaid vehicle directly from the Manufacturer, has cost to Exchequer an amount to the tune of Rs. 10,72,441 for every such vehicle and thus, in other words, for purchasing 144 vehicles, the State of Punjab has paid minimum of Rs.15.44 crore extra, even if the bulk discount was not available.

Hence, he contended that State Exchequer suffered loss of over Rs. 15 crores.

However, the AG Punjab brought to the court's notice that two FIRs are pending against the petitioner, involving serious allegations such as extortion and forgery. Therefore, in the absence of disclosed antecedents, the PIL is not maintainable, he added.

In the light of the above, the plea was dismissed as withdrawn.

Mr. H.C. Arora, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Maninderjit Singh Bedi, Advocate General, Punjab with Mr. Rajeev Madaan, DAG, Punjab,

Mr. T.P.S. Walia, AAG, Punjab, and Mr. Sangam Garg, Advocate

Mr. Akashdeep Singh, Special Public Prosecutor, CBI for respondent No. 4.

Title: Satnam Singh Dhawan v. State of Punjab and others

Click here to read order