- विज्ञापन -
Chandigarh: The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Monday directed the Punjab government to respond to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition that requests a forensic investigation into viral audio clips allegedly implicating a senior police officer in seeking sexual favors from women.
The bench comprising Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sumeet Goel asked the State Chief Secretary and the Director General of Police (DGP) to submit an affidavit addressing the allegations. The court did not issue a formal notice in the case, filed by advocate Nikhil Saraf, after the state raised objections about the PIL’s maintainability.
The court remarked that the contentious legal objection raised by the state would be kept open for argument in the next hearing, but only after the affidavit is filed.
Saraf argued that the viral audio recordings suggest the involvement of an officer in prostitution, trafficking, and sexual abuse. He also requested that the Central Forensic Science Laboratory produce a report on the recordings. Additionally, Saraf sought to reveal the identities of the officers allegedly heard in the calls.
He emphasized that the PIL highlights serious institutional lapses in investigating these allegations, which have significant implications for police accountability and gender justice in Punjab. Saraf pointed out that the case involves two audio clips that appear to link an officer to illegal activities, as well as raise concerns about possible connections between police personnel and the state’s drug trade.
Despite several representations, Saraf claimed authorities failed to thoroughly examine the audio recordings. The petition notes that complaints made to oversight bodies such as the Police Complaints Authority and Punjab Women’s Commission were dismissed or ignored. It also criticizes a recent order by a Ludhiana Judicial Magistrate to suppress the recordings without forensic analysis or a proper hearing, claiming the order was beyond the magistrate’s jurisdiction. The High Court’s single-judge had previously stayed the magistrate’s gag order, and the division bench today indicated that the magistrate had acted outside her authority.
Advocate Amit Sharma representing Saraf stated that the petitioner seeks only an investigation. He criticized the police for allegedly not taking proper action in similar cases, asserting that the police tend to suppress investigations, especially involving influential officers who call themselves “encounter specialists.”
The Court responded that the petitioner could approach a magistrate to register an FIR related to the matter. Sharma explained that the petitioner had exhausted other avenues without success and highlighted the influence wielded by the IPS officer involved.
At this point, the High Court agreed to seek an affidavit from the Punjab Chief Secretary and the DGP, before proceeding further.
