HC Junks Vigilance FIR Against Ex-Minister,PSIEC Officers and Gulmohar Township; Raps Vigilance for ‘Misusing Powers’

Babushahi Network Bureau

Chandigarh, January 12, 2025: The Punjab and Haryana High Court has ruled that the Vigilance Bureau (VB), Punjab, misused its powers in registering an FIR against former Punjab minister Sham Sunder Arora and officers of the Punjab Small Industries and Export Corporation (PSIEC) in connection with an alleged industrial plot transfer scam in Mohali district.

The court found that the bifurcation of plots was lawfully approved by the competent authority and dismissed the VB's claim of a Rs 500-700 crore loss as "completely imaginary." The court further criticized the VB for selectively targeting and victimizing the petitioners, noting that similar cases of plot bifurcation in the state had not led to criminal proceedings.

Justice Mr Mahabir Singh Sindhu delivered the judgment, allowing several petitions filed by Arora and other accused officers. The bench quashed the FIR registered in January 2023, which alleged charges of breach of trust, corruption, cheating, and forgery, calling it an act of harassment and humiliation.

Former Minister Cleared of Wrongdoing
The High Court gave a clean chit to Arora, ruling that he had not extended undue favors to any individual, including Gulmohar Township. The court noted that Arora had merely sought information in his official capacity, which did not amount to a criminal offense.

Officers Exonerated
The court also absolved the PSIEC officers, stating that they had acted diligently and in accordance with the law while recommending the bifurcation and fragmentation of plots.

Credibility of Complainant Questioned
The court raised serious concerns about the complainant’s identity and credibility. It stated that the complaint, purportedly filed under the name "Navjot Singh-Congressman," was a pseudo-communication to the Chief Vigilance Commissioner. The court observed that the petitioners had been made scapegoats by certain disgruntled elements misusing the vigilance bureau’s office.

Case Background
The dispute revolved around a 25-acre industrial plot allotted at concessional rates to PALI Ltd. in 1984 for setting up an industrial unit. The company failed to deliver on its obligations, leading to the plot’s transfer through several entities, eventually ending up with private developer Gulmohar Township. The VB alleged that the plot had been fraudulently bifurcated into 125 smaller plots without following due process, claiming that the state would have earned Rs 500-700 crore had proper procedures been followed.

However, the court clarified that the transaction involved routine approvals and did not constitute criminal misconduct. The detailed order, released on Friday, brought an end to the long-standing controversy, providing relief to the former minister and the PSIEC officers.

‘Harassment Without Basis’

“The Vigilance Bureau, misusing its powers, registered the impugned FIR without any basis, solely to harass and humiliate the petitioners,” the court remarked. The FIR was initially registered in January 2023, accusing Arora and PSIEC officials of breach of trust, corruption, cheating, and forgery.

Justice Sindhu further observed that the allegations stemmed from a complaint dated June 21, 2021, filed by an individual identified as “Navjot Singh-Congressman.” The complaint, forwarded to the Punjab State Chief Vigilance Commissioner, accused the parties of irregularities in the transfer and bifurcation of an industrial plot in Mohali.

However, the court pointed out that the complaint was a “pseudo communication” made with ulterior motives. “Till date, the identity or credentials of the complainant are not known. Neither did Navjot Singh-Congressman join the preliminary inquiry, nor was he associated with the investigation for reasons best known to the Vigilance Bureau,” the court stated.

Click to read full copy of the judgment: 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1MLaLtT6MdEvahHRbpbU60nWdyiqatN6z/view?usp=sharing

Plot Transfer Traced to Lawful Means

The case involved a 25-acre industrial plot in Mohali, originally allotted to Punjab Anand Lamp Industries Ltd. (PALI Ltd.) on July 30, 1984, for setting up an industrial unit. Justice Sindhu meticulously traced the plot’s ownership, noting that its transfer through multiple entities—Phillips India Ltd., Phillips Lighting India Ltd., Signify Innovations Ltd., and finally Gulmohar Township—was lawful and in compliance with regulations.

The PSIEC, the court noted, had issued a no-dues certificate, and Gulmohar Township eventually acquired the plot for Rs 110 crore. The Vigilance Bureau’s claim that the transfer violated allotment terms and caused a loss of Rs 500-700 crore to the state was deemed “completely imaginary.”

‘Selective Targeting’ by Vigilance Bureau

The court took strong exception to the VB’s actions, stating, “Numerous instances exist in Punjab where bigger plots were bifurcated or fragmented into smaller plots, yet no criminal proceedings were initiated in those cases. The petitioners have been selectively targeted and victimized by the bureau for reasons best known to them.”

Justice Sindhu added that the bifurcation and fragmentation of the Mohali plot into 125 smaller plots were in line with PSIEC’s 2005 policy, which had been consistently applied across Punjab.

No Criminal Intent by Gulmohar Township

The High Court gave a clean chit to Sham Sunder Arora, asserting he had not shown undue favor to any individual, including Gulmohar Township. The court clarified that Arora’s actions—seeking reports and information in his official capacity—did not constitute criminal misconduct.

Similarly, the PSIEC officers involved were found to have performed their duties diligently and in accordance with the law.

The court emphasized that Gulmohar Township had complied with all legal formalities while obtaining approvals for the bifurcation and fragmentation of the plot. “Thus, no criminal intent can be attributed to their part in purchasing or bifurcating/fragmenting the plot,” the court observed.

‘Ulterior Motives’ Behind the Complaint

In scathing remarks, Justice Sindhu asserted that the complaint was filed with malicious intent to scapegoat the petitioners. The court said it was inconceivable how the Chief Vigilance Commissioner acted on the complaint without verifying its authenticity or the complainant’s credentials.

Conclusion

The High Court’s ruling not only quashed the FIR but also criticized the Vigilance Bureau for its lack of due diligence and selective targeting. The judgment provides relief to the former minister and PSIEC officers, while raising serious concerns about the misuse of investigative powers in Punjab.

Click to read full copy of the judgment: 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1MLaLtT6MdEvahHRbpbU60nWdyiqatN6z/view?usp=sharing