1 week ago
High Court Reinstates DSP Sandhu Over Lawrence Bishnoi Interview Dismissal
A police officer named Gursher Singh Sandhu was dismissed after a jailed gangster’s interview was recorded.
The interview was made while Lawrence Bishnoi was in police custody.
The Punjab government said Sandhu helped make the interview possible and did not cooperate with the investigation.
Sandhu denied those claims and said other police units handled Bishnoi’s inner security.
The High Court said the government should normally hold a proper departmental inquiry before imposing dismissal.
It said the government had not shown why such an inquiry was impossible.
The court also found no evidence that Sandhu had threatened witnesses or interfered with the case.
Sandhu must be reinstated and receive related benefits.
However, the government can still continue the departmental inquiry against him and other officers.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court quashed DSP Gursher Singh Sandhu’s dismissal and ordered his reinstatement with consequential benefits.
The court ruled that Punjab improperly bypassed a regular departmental inquiry under Article 311(2)(b).
Sandhu was dismissed over allegations that he facilitated Lawrence Bishnoi’s interview while Bishnoi was in police custody.
The court found no sufficient evidence that Sandhu deliberately evaded proceedings, threatened witnesses, tampered with evidence or obstructed the inquiry.
The state may continue its pending departmental inquiry against Sandhu and other officers involved in the same incident.
- Who
- DSP Gursher Singh Sandhu, the Punjab government, the Punjab and Haryana High Court, and other police officers involved in the inquiry.
- What
- The High Court quashed Sandhu’s dismissal and ordered his reinstatement while allowing the pending departmental inquiry to continue.
- Where
- The interview was recorded at CIA Staff, Kharar, while Bishnoi was in police custody; the case was decided by the Punjab and Haryana High Court.
- When
- Lawrence Bishnoi’s interview was recorded on the intervening night of September 3 and 4, 2022; Sandhu’s dismissal order was dated January 2, 2025; the judgment was released on Wednesday.
- Why
- The court held that Punjab had not demonstrated circumstances making a regular departmental inquiry constitutionally impracticable under Article 311(2)(b).
Sandhu’s Position and Court’s Findings
Punjab Government’s Position
Need for a regular inquiry
Sandhu’s Position and Court’s Findings
Sandhu argued that dismissal was a major penalty requiring a regular departmental inquiry, and the High Court held that Punjab had not justified dispensing with one.
Punjab Government’s Position
Punjab invoked Article 311(2)(b), arguing that circumstances justified proceeding without a regular inquiry.
Alleged non-cooperation
Sandhu’s Position and Court’s Findings
Sandhu denied deliberately evading service or refusing to cooperate; the court noted that he had replied to notices, sought documents and later appeared in inquiry proceedings.
Punjab Government’s Position
The state cited alleged evasion of service and non-cooperation, including failure to receive the chargesheet, as grounds for bypassing the inquiry.
Sandhu’s alleged role
Sandhu’s Position and Court’s Findings
Sandhu denied facilitating the interview and said the Anti-Gangster Task Force supervised Bishnoi’s inner security, while CIA Staff handled outer-cordon and transit security.
Punjab Government’s Position
The state alleged that Sandhu facilitated the interview by being present at CIA Staff, Kharar, and maintaining personal and telephone contact with journalist Jagwinder Patial.
Key facts
- Officer
- Gursher Singh Sandhu, then Mohali DSP (Detective)
- Underlying incident
- Lawrence Bishnoi’s interview was recorded during police custody on September 3-4, 2022.
- Dismissal order
- Punjab dismissed Sandhu on January 2, 2025, invoking Article 311(2)(b).
- Court’s ruling
- The dismissal was quashed because the state failed to justify bypassing a regular departmental inquiry.
- Reinstatement
- The state was directed to reinstate Sandhu with all consequential benefits.
- Pending inquiry
- A departmental inquiry involving Sandhu and other officers before Justice Rajiv Narain Raina may continue.
- Allegations
- The state alleged that Sandhu facilitated the interview and failed to cooperate with the proceedings.
Quotes
Punjab and Haryana High Court
The High Court, in Justice Namit Kumar’s judgment, explaining the standard for dispensing with a departmental inquiry.
“Mere recital in the order that an inquiry is not reasonably practicable would not, by itself, be sufficient. The competent authority must demonstrate a real and proximate nexus between the circumstances prevailing at the relevant time and the inability to hold departmental enquiry.”
indianexpress.com
“If the inquiry could be conducted against the other officers in respect of the same occurrence, the respondents were required to demonstrate some additional circumstance peculiar to the petitioner which made an inquiry against him impracticable. No such circumstance has been shown.”
indianexpress.com
Sources
Related news
High Court Quashes Punjab DSP’s Dismissal Over Bishnoi Jail Interview
High Court Orders Reinstatement of Jammu Kashmir Bank Officer
Supreme Court Stays Reinstatement in IAS Dog-Walk Row
High Court Issues Contempt Notice to Retired DGP Khurania
Punjab DA Ruling Sparks Dispute Over Court Procedure
Western Disturbances May Forecast North India’s Winter Pollution
Athawale Urges BJP, SAD, RPI Alliance Ahead of Punjab Polls
Maryam Nawaz Sharif’s Daughter’s Wedding Sparks Pakistan Taxpayer Concerns
Amritsar’s Ramesh Wins Two Golds at East Asia Competition
High Court Gives Punjab 10 Days to Pursue DA Challenge
