Punjab & Haryana High Court Initiates Contempt Proceedings Against Senior Police Officials for Delayed FIR Registration
In a significant move underscoring judicial authority, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has initiated suo motu contempt proceedings against nine police officers, including four Indian Police Service (IPS) officers, for an eight-month delay in registering a First Information Report (FIR) concerning a high-stakes fraud case. The court found this delay to be a flagrant violation of established Supreme Court guidelines and statutory law.
Officers Named in Contempt Action
The proceedings implicate several high-ranking officials, including:
Mr Rakesh Kumar Arya, IGP (Crime), formerly Commissioner of Police, Panchkula.
Mr Sibash Kabiraj, the current Commissioner of Police, Panchkula.
Ms. Himadree Kaushik and Mr Manpreet Singh, former Deputy Commissioners of Police (DCP), Panchkula.
Mr Vikram Nehra and Mr Surender Singh (Haryana Police Service), Assistant Commissioners of Police.
Inspectors Mr Hitender Singh and Mr Kamlajeet Singh.
Sub-Inspector Mr Parkash Chand of the Economic Offences Wing.
Presiding over the matter, Justice Harpreet Kaur Jeewan has directed the officers to submit their responses by November 18, 2025.
Case Background and Judicial Scrutiny
The contempt action originates from FIR No. 265, registered on June 19, 2025, at Chandimandir Police Station, Panchkula, under charges of criminal breach of trust and cheating. The complainant, Mr Malkiat Singh, alleged that following an Enforcement Directorate (ED) raid on his residence in January 2024, an individual claiming to be an MLA’s personal assistant demanded ₹1 crore to influence the ED case. The money was allegedly paid in two instalments, after which the accused purportedly misappropriated the funds and demanded an additional ₹8 crore, accompanied by threats of arrest and violence.
Violation of Supreme Court Mandate
The court highlighted a direct contravention of the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in Lalita Kumari vs. State of UP, which mandates the immediate registration of an FIR, permitting a preliminary inquiry only in exceptional circumstances and for a period not exceeding seven days. Despite the complaint being filed on October 23, 2024, the FIR was not registered until June 19, 2025—a delay of nearly eight months for which the police provided no satisfactory justification. The court characterized the conduct of the police as “stolid, nay recalcitrant.”
The matter was referred for contempt proceedings by Justice Sumeet Goel on September 1, following the dismissal of anticipatory bail pleas from the accused.
Legal Implications and Next Steps
The proceedings have been formally initiated under Section 2(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, which addresses willful disobedience of any court judgment or order. After verification of the officers’ current postings, the Chief Justice approved the initiation of contempt on September 9.
The implicated officers are now required to present their defenses before the court by the stipulated November deadline.
Broader Significance
This case serves as a potent reminder of the judiciary’s unwavering commitment to upholding procedural integrity and police accountability. By targeting senior officials, the High Court’s action signals a stringent approach toward eradicating negligence that undermines the justice system and the rule of law.
