2 hrs ago
Justice Sheel Nagu Recuses From Punjab’s CBI Probe Challenge
Punjab is asking the Supreme Court to cancel an order for the CBI to investigate corruption allegations connected to the chief minister’s office.
Justice Sheel Nagu was first assigned to hear the case with Justice Dipankar Datta.
The court was told that Nagu had previously handled petitions from the same person who filed the public-interest case behind the investigation.
Nagu then stepped aside from hearing the matter.
The court did not give a detailed explanation for his decision.
Punjab says the legal basis for ordering the investigation should be reviewed.
The allegations have not been decided in the Supreme Court.
The Chief Justice of India will choose another bench to hear the petition.
Justice Sheel Nagu recused himself from hearing Punjab’s challenge to a CBI corruption probe linked to Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann’s office.
The case had been assigned to a bench with Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Nagu.
The recusal followed disclosure that Nagu had previously dealt with petitions filed by the same PIL petitioner in the Punjab and Haryana High Court.
The Punjab government is challenging a High Court order directing the CBI to investigate allegations involving Officer on Special Duty Rajbir Singh Ghuman.
The Chief Justice of India is to assign the petition to another bench; the Supreme Court has not ruled on the merits.
- Who
- The Punjab government; Supreme Court Justices Sheel Nagu and Dipankar Datta; and the CBI.
- What
- Justice Nagu recused himself from hearing Punjab’s challenge to a High Court order for a CBI investigation.
- Where
- The Supreme Court of India in New Delhi.
- When
- Friday, October 9, 2026.
- Why
- Nagu had previously dealt with petitions filed by the same PIL petitioner. The court gave no detailed explanation establishing the precise reason for the recusal.
Punjab Government and Ghuman’s Arguments
Case for the CBI Probe
Whether the High Court order should stand
Punjab Government and Ghuman’s Arguments
Punjab is challenging the direction for a CBI investigation and argues that the legal basis for ordering it should be reviewed.
Case for the CBI Probe
The Punjab and Haryana High Court directed the CBI to register a criminal case and investigate after considering a PIL alleging that police had not acted on information shared by the ED.
Meaning of the ED information
Punjab Government and Ghuman’s Arguments
Ghuman argued that police were required to act on information shared under Section 66(2) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act only if it disclosed a cognisable offence. He also argued that the High Court order conflicted with the Vijay Madanlal Chaudhary judgment.
Case for the CBI Probe
The PIL alleged that Punjab Police had failed to take appropriate action despite ED communications seeking an investigation.
Political motivation
Punjab Government and Ghuman’s Arguments
Ghuman argued that the case was politically motivated and being pursued because Punjab was approaching elections.
Case for the CBI Probe
The High Court ordered an investigation into allegations that an intermediary facilitated government transfers, access to confidential documents, arms licences, and other benefits.
Key facts
- Recusing judge
- Justice Sheel Nagu
- Other judge on the listed bench
- Justice Dipankar Datta
- Date of recusal
- October 9, 2026
- Underlying order
- The Punjab and Haryana High Court directed the CBI to register a criminal case and investigate allegations involving Rajbir Singh Ghuman.
- PIL petitioner
- Advocate Nikhil Saraf
- Next step
- The Chief Justice of India will assign the petition to another bench.
- Status
- The Supreme Court has not decided the merits of Punjab’s challenge; the allegations remain subject to investigation.
Quotes
Justice Dipankar Datta
Supreme Court justice who announced Nagu’s recusal.
“We are in very difficult times Mr. Gupta. One doesn’t know, from where the attack will come from. There are 17 other benches.”
freepressjournal.in
“It can’t be heard by Justice Nagu; it will be assigned to another bench by the CJI.”
freepressjournal.in









