The Supreme Court questioned how a journalist accessed gangster Lawrence Bishnoi in jail for a televised interview. Ex-Punjab DSP Sandhu, who was in charge that night, faced scrutiny over alleged complicity.
New Delhi: Today, on June 24, the Supreme Court of India dismissed as withdrawn a petition filed by former Punjab Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) Gursher Singh Sandhu.
He had approached the apex court in relation to the controversial jail interview of gangster Lawrence Bishnoi, which was aired publicly and sparked a massive inquiry.
ALSO READ: Supreme Court Grants Bail to Punjab Man Accused of Rape and Alleged Links to Gangster Lawrence Bishnoi
Gursher Singh Sandhu had challenged the issuance of notices under Section 41A of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), stating that he was being summoned even though he had not been named as an accused in the First Information Report (FIR).
His petition also included a prayer to quash the entire proceedings initiated against him.
A two-judge Bench comprising Justices KV Viswanathan and N Kotiswar Singh heard the matter. During the hearing, Justice Viswanathan questioned the unusual circumstances under which the interview was recorded inside jail premises.
He asked,
“How was the journalist able to access Bishnoi inside the jail premises?”
He also pointed out that Sandhu was reportedly in charge on the night before the interview was recorded.
The Court took note of the fact that Sandhu had already filed a writ petition before the Punjab and Haryana High Court, which is scheduled to be heard on July 3, 2025.
Considering this, the Bench declined to intervene in the matter and dismissed the petition as withdrawn. The Court added that Sandhu is at liberty to pursue appropriate reliefs before the High Court.
During the Supreme Court hearing, Senior Advocate Vikram Chaudhri, appearing for Sandhu, argued that his client was being unfairly targeted.
He submitted that although the journalist who recorded the interview was granted interim protection by the Supreme Court, Sandhu—who allegedly had no direct involvement—was facing action.
He stated,
“Sandhu never had access to Bishnoi and that he was being selectively targeted.”
He further highlighted that
“the notice was being issued even as the journalist who recorded the interview had secured interim protection from the Supreme Court.”
The entire issue stems from a televised interview of Lawrence Bishnoi, who is an accused in the murder case of popular singer Sidhu Moosewala.
The interview was aired by ABP Sanjha in March 2023, while Bishnoi was still in custody. This created a public uproar and prompted the Punjab and Haryana High Court to take suo motu cognisance of mobile phone usage and recording equipment inside jails.
To investigate the matter, a Special Investigation Team (SIT) was formed. As per the findings of the SIT, the first interview took place during the night of September 3–4, 2022, when Bishnoi was in the custody of the Crime Investigation Agency (CIA), Kharar.
The second interview was allegedly recorded while Bishnoi was lodged in a jail in Rajasthan. After the probe, the Punjab government suspended seven police officers, including Sandhu, and also initiated departmental proceedings against them.
In a related development, the Punjab and Haryana High Court, in November 2024, made strong observations against the conduct of Punjab Police officers.
The Court noted that
“Punjab Police officers had not only allowed the use of electronic devices inside the jail, but had also facilitated a studio-like environment for the interview.”
The High Court then directed the State to take strict action against the senior officers who were found to be involved, adding that
“the State was also advised not to scapegoat lower-ranking personnel.”
Challenging his suspension and departmental action, Sandhu had earlier moved the High Court in January 2025. On June 4, 2025, the High Court directed the State of Punjab to present all material linking Sandhu to the offence in a sealed cover.
ALSO READ: TV Interview in Jail | Supreme Court Dismisses Lawrence Bishnoi’s Plea Against SIT Formation and FIR by High Court
In that order, the Court also observed that
“the general diary entry recording his transposition as an accused did not disclose any reasons.”
At the Supreme Court, Senior Advocate Vikram Chaudhri urged the Bench to grant interim protection from coercive action to Sandhu until the High Court heard the matter.
However, the Bench declined the request and stated in its order that the petition stood
“dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to pursue reliefs before the High Court.”
Background of the Case
The controversy began in March 2023 when ABP Sanjha broadcast televised interviews of jailed gangster Lawrence Bishnoi, a key accused in the Sidhu Moosewala murder case.
These interviews, allegedly recorded while Bishnoi was in police custody and later in a Rajasthan jail, raised serious questions about security lapses and misuse of mobile phones inside prisons.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court took suo motu cognisance of the incident and directed the formation of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to probe how such access was possible.
The SIT discovered that the first interview was recorded during the night of September 3–4, 2022, while Bishnoi was under the custody of the Crime Investigation Agency (CIA) in Kharar, Punjab.
As a result of the probe, seven Punjab Police officers, including then-DSP Gursher Singh Sandhu, were suspended and departmental action was initiated.
In November 2024, the High Court severely criticised the police, stating that officers had allowed the use of electronic devices and even facilitated a “studio-like environment” for the interview.
The Court directed strict action against senior officers and cautioned the State not to scapegoat junior personnel.
Sandhu challenged his suspension and the proceedings against him before the High Court, claiming he was being selectively targeted despite not being named in the FIR.
When he later approached the Supreme Court seeking interim protection and quashing of proceedings under Section 41A CrPC, the apex court questioned his role and eventually dismissed the petition as withdrawn, asking him to pursue remedies before the High Court.
Case title:
Gursher Singh Sandhu v. State of Punjab & Anr.
Read Order:
Click Here to Read More Reports On Lawrence Bishnoi
