The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Tuesday overturned the dismissal of Deputy Superintendent of Police Gursher Singh Sandhu, ordering the Punjab government to reinstate him with all consequential benefits after ruling that authorities had no constitutional basis to bypass a standard departmental inquiry.
Allowing Sandhu’s writ petition, Justice Namit Kumar quashed the state administration’s dismissal order dated January 2, 2025, which had been issued under Article 311(2)(b) of the Constitution. The bench clarified that the officer’s reinstatement would not impede the state from proceeding with the regular departmental inquiry already pending against Sandhu and other personnel before an inquiry officer.
Failure To Meet Constitutional Threshold
The court determined that the government failed to establish circumstances warranting the omission of a full departmental probe, ruling that the administration’s recorded justification did not satisfy the constitutional requirements of Article 311(2)(b).
Addressing the state’s argument that Sandhu had been non-cooperative and had failed to accept the complete chargesheet, Justice Kumar held that an employee’s refusal to participate or absence cannot be elevated into a justification for declaring an inquiry constitutionally impracticable. The bench stated that a delinquent staff member cannot derail a disciplinary probe simply by staying away, and noted that merely reciting in an order that an inquiry is impracticable is not enough without demonstrating a direct and proximate link between existing circumstances and the inability to hold the proceedings.
Absence Of Witness Tampering Or Coercion
The high court emphasized that the state placed no evidence on record showing that Sandhu had threatened or coerced any witnesses, nor had any witness expressed reluctance to come forward due to intimidation attributable to him.
The judgment also highlighted that there was no material presented before the court to demonstrate that Sandhu had attempted to tamper with evidence or interfere with the functioning of the inquiry officer.
Allegations And Officer Defense
The dismissal stemmed from allegations that Sandhu facilitated the recording of an interview of incarcerated gangster Lawrence Bishnoi while Bishnoi was in police custody. The controversy erupted after a private television channel aired two separate interviews with Bishnoi in March 2023.
Sandhu, who was serving as DSP in SAS Nagar when authorities served him show-cause notices in September and October 2024, contested the government’s action on the grounds that invoking Article 311(2)(b) denied him a fair opportunity to be heard. In his petition, Sandhu submitted that he was never an investigating officer in any case involving Bishnoi and played no role in transferring the gangster to Punjab or overseeing his detention at the Mohali CIA staff premises.
