High Court indicates Punjab to submit an affidavit in Pil to cash-for-sex scandal

The Supreme Court of Punjab and Haryana instructed Punjab on Monday to submit an affidavit in response to a legal dispute of the public interest in which two audio recordings were requested for a forensic review of a senior IPS officer in a cash for family scandal.

The Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sumeeet Goel department stated the instruction, while he listened to a petition submitted by the Supreme Court.

The bank made it clear that the question of the location mentioned by the state would be taken into account after submitting the affidavit.

The lawyer Amit Sharma, who appeared for the petent, stated that the case reflected a serious collapse of the institutional accountability. “This is a matter in which institutional silence hits a blow in the core of our constitutional values,” he told the court.

Sharma presented a thorough submission. At first he stated that the petition recorded two audio recordings. In a male voice, similar to that of a publicly profiled IPS officer, it can be heard that he negotiates paid sex, requesting a threesome and negotiating the price about the price that arranges for another.

In the second, the same voice says a woman who says she changes from uniform to send explicit photos to a group chat.

Sharma also stipulated that the records with a persistent NDPS case overlap with a policeman who called the name of an IPS officer during her arrest and was found in the possession of heroin and not taken into account.

In addition, he argued that the matter fits into a wider pattern of the institutional failure. Citing past judicial statements, Sharma referred to repeated delays in investigations, non-action against high-ranking civil servants and signs of an consultation between law enforcement authorities and criminal networks.

In response to questions from the bank as to whether appropriate remedies were being pursued in front of the Court of Justice, Sharma said that Nikhil Saraf, the petent, sent symptoms to several statutory authorities.

He said that the prime minister's office forwarded the complaint to the home department, which is not acting. The police authority's authority rejected the complaint on a close technical reason. The Punjab State Women's Commission did not react, although in accordance with Section 10 of the Law on Punjab State Women Commission to act SUO Motu.

Sharma also emphasized that an judicial judge had issued an ex -part gag arrangement that suppressed the records without notice, hearing or forensic review. This command, the state lawyer intervened, has remained the High Court since then.

When Punjab obvious for reasons of the place and the maintainability, and argued that the petent aimed at search registration, Sharma replied that the new provisions in accordance with § 175 (4) of the Bharatiya Nagarikikike Suraksha Sanhita had raised the officers for the first time and the officers. According to the officials, this would protect the officials and make justice difficult.

When Sharma was asked about the basis of his statement in the petition of the bank, he read from several top arrangements with the petition. This included one in which the same officer was fined by a Lakh rupies for the delay of a criminal proceedings for over two years, another, in which the court intervened 12 years later to secure the Fir registration in a rape and murder case, and an arrangement in which the court gave nationwide instructions on the impression of prostitution and trade.

He also quoted an order in which the court led measures against high -ranking civil servants who made a prison interview for a defendant, and found that no measures had been taken and, despite the court specific instructions, had not been taken any action and had not been submitted.

After hearing the submissions, the Punjab department bank instructed to submit an affidavit as an answer. The question of the locus is dealt with after receipt of the affidavit. The matter was postponed until July 17th.