The Supreme Court has adjourned the State of Punjab’s challenge to the High Court order directing a CBI probe linked to the Chief Minister’s office, after the file reached one of the judges late.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday adjourned the plea of the State of Punjab against the Punjab and Haryana High Court‘s order directing the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to register a criminal case and probe allegations of corruption linked to the office of Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann, including allegations concerning his Officer on Special Duty (OSD), to the next day. The allegations are untested, the courts have expressed no view on their merits, and the presumption of innocence applies to all concerned [State of Punjab v. Nikhil Saraf].
A Bench of Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Sheel Nagu heard the matter. Senior Advocate Vikas Singh appeared for the State of Punjab.
What happened in Court
Justice Datta said the matter would be taken up the next day because the case file reached Justice Nagu late. Mr Singh asked for an interim order restraining precipitative steps in the meantime. The Bench asked how an interim order could be passed when the judges had not read the file, and did not grant interim protection at this stage. The matter is to be taken up on Friday, 9 October 2026.
The High Court order
On 5 October 2026, a Bench of Chief Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Rohit Kapoor of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, in a public interest litigation filed by advocate Nikhil Saraf, directed the CBI to register a case and report within two months, and directed the State and its police to cooperate. The petition alleged that the Punjab Police did not act on communications from the Enforcement Directorate (ED) concerning Rajbir Singh Ghuman, the OSD to the Chief Minister, and an alleged intermediary. These are the ED’s allegations as cited in the petition, and no court has found anyone guilty of anything.
The State’s case
Mr Singh, when he mentioned the matter before the Chief Justice of India on 6 October, contended that the PIL is politically motivated and was pursued because the State faces elections soon. He argued that the High Court overlooked that police must act only if the information discloses a cognizable offence, and that its order conflicts with the Supreme Court’s judgment in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary. The State also contends that the direction was issued without the prior approval required under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, and that general consent to the CBI under Section 6 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act stands withdrawn.
In the alternative, it seeks a preliminary inquiry by the Punjab Bureau of Investigation. These are the State’s contentions, and the Supreme Court has not ruled on them.
The other side
The petitioner in the High Court, advocate Nikhil Saraf, sought a fair and independent investigation, contending that no action was taken even after the ED’s communications to the State. The High Court accepted that a CBI probe was warranted on the material before it. Counsel for the respondents were not recorded as having argued at this hearing.
ALSO READ: Punjab And Haryana HC Orders CBI Probe Into ED’s Allegations Against Punjab CM’s OSD
Why the order matters
The adjournment means the High Court’s directions remain in place for now, as no stay or interim protection has been granted. The Supreme Court is yet to examine the State’s grounds, including those on Section 17A, the withdrawal of general consent and the reach of the Vijay Madanlal Choudhary ruling, and the next hearing will show how the Bench proceeds.
Case Title: State of Punjab v. Nikhil Saraf (Diary No. 62464/2026)
Bench: Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Sheel Nagu, Supreme Court of India
Date of Hearing: October 8, 2026 (adjourned to October 9, 2026)
Impugned order: Punjab and Haryana High Court, October 5, 2026
Appearances: Senior Advocate Vikas Singh for the State of Punjab.