- Home
- /
- High Courts
- /
- Punjab and Haryana High Court
- /
- Repeated Pleas By Roop Bansal...
Repeated Pleas By Roop Bansal Seeking To File & Withdraw Quashing Plea In Judge Bribery Case Amounts To Bench Hunting: ED Tells P&H HC
Aiman J. Chishti
17 Sept 2025 6:40 PM IST
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has submitted before the Punjab and Haryana High Court that repeated pleas by businessman Roop Bansal, seeking to file and withdraw petitions for quashing an FIR against him for conspiring to bribe a Trial Court judge amounts to "bench hunting."Bansal is booked under provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act and for criminal conspiracy under Section...
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has submitted before the Punjab and Haryana High Court that repeated pleas by businessman Roop Bansal, seeking to file and withdraw petitions for quashing an FIR against him for conspiring to bribe a Trial Court judge amounts to "bench hunting."
Bansal is booked under provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act and for criminal conspiracy under Section 120B IPC.
In a reply filed by the ED through Special PP Lokesh Narang to Justice Manjari Nehru Kaul it stated that, "repetitive conduct of the petitioner to file and withdraw the quashing petitions tantamount to forum shopping/ bench hunting which cannot be permitted. Substantial judicial time has been spent on the adjudication of the present case and the petitioner should not be allowed to abuse het process of law merely because she/he can afford to."
"The conduct of the petitioner amounts to forum shopping. Avoiding a bench is as much forum shopping as attempting to choose a bench," it added.
Reliance was placed on Supreme Court's decision in the matter of Sanjiv Kumar Rajendrabhai Bhatt vs. State of Gujarat & Anr. in [SLP(Crl) No. 9445 of 2022]. The relevant extract of the judgement is as follows-
"Having heard the learned Senior Advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties at length on the letter circulated, we are of the opinion that the request of recusal is nothing but an attempt to indulge in Forum Shopping and Bench Hunting and to avoid the Bench with mala fide intention."
Stating that conduct of the petitioner, the attempt of "withdrawing at this stage is nothing but an abuse of process of law", the ED prayed for dismissal of the application for withdrawal of the petition.
Today, Advocate appearing for the petitioner sought adjournment to go through the response filed by the ED.
The matter is now listed for October 13.
Background
Bansal's first plea for quashing of FIR was was withdrawn in February to file it afresh, with better particulars. The second quashing plea was then filed in April. However, Bansal again approached the Court to withdraw it.
This second plea for withdrawal was listed before two judges and was subsequently placed before the CJ over allegations of bench hunting by the realtor. As the CJ eventually recused, the matter was listed before Justice Manjari Nehru Kaul and then before Jasjit Singh Bedi. After Justice Bedi recused, the case was sent back to Justice Kaul.
Recently the State Bar Council had taken cognisance of alleged "bench hunting" tactics employed in the Roop Bansal case.Sixteen advocates were summoned for an inquiry into accusations that they may have been involved in the matter.
The Chief Justice had orally observed during the hearing that the case was filed by him just to "get the case out of a particular bench."
In its recent order the Bar Council had called for complaints against lawyers or litigants involved in bench hunting or forum shopping.
Title: ROOP BANSAL VS. STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.
Mr. Avishkar Singhvi, Advocate (through VC) and Mr. Vivek Kumar Singh and Mr. Baljeet Beniwal Advocates for the petitioner.
Mr. Rahul Mohan, Additional Advocate General, Haryana.
Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Special Counsel (through VC) Mr. Lokesh Narang, Senior Panel Counsel
Mr. Shubhleen Dhariwal, Advocate and Kaushlendra Vikram, Advocate (through VC) for respondent-ED