Lawrence Bishnoi Interview From Jail Row: P&H High Court Dismisses Accused Police Official's Plea Challenging Allowing Of Polygraph Test

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has dismissed a plea filed by police officials accused in the Lawrence Bishnoi interview from jail case, challenging the order permitting polygraph test on them.

FIR was lodged against jail officials after the High Court took suo moto cognisance of the viral interview of the ganster Lawrence Bishnoi given while he was in custody at Police Station CIA Staff in Punjab's Kharar.

Justice N.S. Shekhawat noted that, "all the petitioners were given access to their counsel and after getting legal advice, all the petitioners had agreed to make a statement before the JMIC, Mohali. Even, the petitioners were apprised of the legalities of voluntarily going through the polygraph test by the Court. Even otherwise, the consent was recorded before a Judicial Magistrate 1st Class and a sanctity is always attached to such proceedings."

The Court added that even, it is clear that the Magistrate must have verified that the statements were not made under any duress, coercion or threat.

"Even otherwise, the statements were recorded by the Magistrate herself and simply because of the fact that at the time of passing of final order by the Court, some member of the 'SIT' was present in the Court would not make any difference," it further said.

The Plea was filed by certain police officials including Constable Simranjeet Singh were posted with Gursher Singh Sandhu, DSP an accused in the case who was dismissed during the investigation of the matter.

FIR was registered under under Sections 384, 201, 202, 506, 116 and 120-B IPC and Section 52-A (1) of Prisons Act (Punjab Amendment Act), 2011. Parbodh Kumar, Special DGP was made head of the 'SIT', which had taken over the investigation in the case.

The counsel for the petitioners vehemently argued that the trial Court as well as the revisional Court had completely overlooked the mandate of law, as elaborated by the Supreme Court in the matter of Selvi and others Vs. State of Karnataka, (2010) 7 SCC 263.

The consent was obtained from petitioners under duress and the application was wrongly allowed and Even, before conducting of polygraph test, the petitioners had filed their individual affidavits and had withdrawn their consent before the revisional Court, he added.

It was further argued that the counsel for the petitioners was not available at the time of recording of their statements by the Judicial Magistrate.

On the other hand, State counsel submitted that earlier also, the petitioners had appeared before the Court of JMIC, Mohali on 05.04.2025 and on that day, the statements of all the petitioners were recorded. The majority of the petitioners had stated that they were not willing to undergo the polygraph test at that moment as they wanted to consult their legal counsel and they may be granted time for consulting their counsel.

Thereafter, the petitioners consulted their counsel and an application was moved for conducting the polygraph test of the petitioners on 16.04.2025, the Court of Judicial Magistrate, recorded the statements of all the petitioners and they all consented for conducting the polygraph test out of their own free will, without any coercion or pressure from any side, he further apprised the Court.

After hearing the submissions, the Court noted that an application was moved for giving consent by the petitioners to undergo polygraph test and the Court of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class recorded the statements of all the petitioners separately and on the basis of the said consent, the application for polygraph test was then allowed.

Perusing the statement given by the petitioners, the Court noted that, from the "statement made by each of the petitioners separately before the Magistrate, it is apparent that all the petitioners were given access to their counsel and after getting legal advice, all the petitioners had agreed to make a statement before the JMIC, Mohali."

Justice Shekhawat highlighted that, "even, the petitioners were apprised of the legalities of voluntarily going through the polygraph test by the Court."

Stating that, "the findings recorded by the revisional Court and the same do not suffer from vice of any material irregularity or illegality," the plea was dismissed.

Mr. D.S. Sobti, Advocate with Mr. Sultaan Singh Sangha, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. I.P.S. Sabharwal, DAG, Punjab.

Title: Constable Simranjeet Singh and others v. State of Punjab

Click here to read/download the order