Punjab and Haryana High Court Denies Bail to Bikram Singh Majithia in Economic Offences Case

Court Cites Seriousness of Economic Offences and Potential Influence on Investigation as Reasons for Dismissal

The Punjab and Haryana High Court, presided over by Justice Tribhuvan Dahiya, has denied bail to Bikram Singh Majithia, a prominent political figure and former Cabinet Minister in the Punjab government, in a case involving serious economic offences. The case, registered under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, pertains to allegations of disproportionate assets, benami entities, and large-scale financial irregularities involving Majithia and his family.

The investigation has uncovered a complex web of financial transactions involving both domestic and foreign entities, leading to accusations of illicit enrichment and acquisition of assets through illegal activities. The court noted that the release of the petitioner at this stage might influence the ongoing investigation and the witnesses involved.

Justice Dahiya emphasized the gravity of economic offences, highlighting their deep-rooted conspiracies and significant impact on public finances and the country's economic health. The court remarked that such offences demand a stricter approach in bail matters, differentiating them from other criminal cases.

The judgment also addressed the legality of registering a second FIR in cases where new facts emerge, pointing to a larger conspiracy. The court cited precedents allowing for a second FIR when new circumstances or unknown facts come to light during an ongoing investigation.

Majithia's counsel argued that the allegations were politically motivated, asserting that the FIR was an extension of an earlier case under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, for which Majithia had already been granted bail. However, the court dismissed these contentions, ruling that the second FIR was warranted given the new evidence of economic misconduct.

The court has directed the investigating agency to complete the investigation within three months, allowing Majithia to seek bail thereafter. The decision underscores the judiciary's cautious stance on granting bail in cases involving significant economic offences, reinforcing the need for comprehensive investigations to safeguard public interest.

Bottom Line:

Economic offences involving disproportionate assets and illegal financial transactions require a different approach in bail matters, considering their grave impact on public exchequer and financial health of the country.

Statutory provision(s): Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 Sections 13(1)(b), 13(2)

Bikram Singh Majithia v. State of Punjab, (Punjab And Haryana) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2817507