The Punjab and Haryana High Court has refused to grant bail to former DIG Harcharan Singh Bhullar, who is facing prosecution by the Central Bureau of Investigation in a corruption case involving alleged demand and acceptance of illegal gratification through an intermediary.
Justice Sumeet Goel, while dismissing Bhullar’s petition under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), held that the allegations against the senior police officer were grave and serious, warranting a cautious approach at the bail stage.
The case arises from an FIR registered by the CBI on the basis of a complaint dated 11 October 2025, alleging that the accused, while posted as DIG, Ropar Range, demanded a bribe through a private intermediary, Krishanu Sharda, in exchange for extending official favour in FIR registered at Police Station Sirhind and for ensuring that no coercive action was taken against the complainant’s business.
During verification, the CBI recorded conversations between the complainant and the intermediary, including a controlled call, which allegedly reflected instructions from the petitioner regarding collection of the bribe amount. Acting on the verification report, the CBI laid a trap on 16 October 2025 at Chandigarh, during which the co-accused was apprehended while allegedly accepting ₹5 lakh as part of the demanded bribe. Bhullar was arrested on the same day, and a charge-sheet has since been filed.
Rejecting the defence contention that no recovery was effected from the accused himself, the Court observed that Section 7A of the Prevention of Corruption Act squarely covers acceptance of undue advantage through an intermediary. At the stage of bail, the Court noted, it is neither required nor appropriate to conduct a meticulous evaluation of evidence; the recorded conversations, trap proceedings, recovery from the co-accused, and digital communications prima facie disclose a case of demand and acceptance of illegal gratification.
The Court also took note that the trial is at a nascent stage: charges have not yet been framed, key witnesses including the complainant and shadow witness are yet to be examined, and further investigation under Section 193(9) BNSS is continuing. Given accused’s long tenure in the police hierarchy, the Court accepted the prosecution’s apprehension that his release could lead to influencing of witnesses or tampering with evidence, notwithstanding his suspension from service.
Holding that corruption allegations against a senior police officer strike at the root of public confidence in the criminal justice system, the High Court concluded that no substantial change in circumstances had been shown to justify a departure from the earlier rejection of bail by the Special CBI Court. Accordingly, the petition for regular bail was dismissed.
Appearances:
Mr. Bipan Ghai, Senior Advocate with Mr. Nikhil Ghai, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Ravi Kamal Gupta, Special Public Prosecutor CBI and Mr Akashdeep Singh, Special Public Prosecutor for the respondent-CBI.
Ms. Puja Chopra, Senior Advocate with Ms. Palak Sharma, Advocate, Mr. Gurminder Singh Salana, Advocate and Mr. Tapish Gupta, Advocate for the complainant.
