SC issues notice on SAD leader Bikram Singh Majithia’s bail plea in disproportionate assets case

The Supreme Court on Friday issued a notice on a plea filed by Shiromani Akali Dal leader and former Punjab minister Bikram Singh Majithia, challenging the Punjab and Haryana High Court’s refusal to grant him regular bail in a corruption case alleging possession of disproportionate assets.

A Bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice N.V. Anjaria issued the notice on Majithia’s petition arising from the high court’s order dismissing his bail plea in an FIR registered by the Punjab Vigilance Bureau under Sections 13(1)(b) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The high court had also declined his request for interim bail.

Advertisement

Appearing for Majithia, senior advocate S. Muralidhar argued that the Punjab government had misused the criminal process by registering a fresh corruption case on the basis of the same financial transactions that had earlier been relied upon in an NDPS case, in which Majithia had already secured bail.

He pointed out that Majithia was granted bail in the NDPS case in August 2022 and that the State’s challenge to that order had failed, with the Supreme Court dismissing its plea in April 2025. During those proceedings, the State had filed a supplementary affidavit claiming that fresh material relating to certain financial transactions had emerged.

Questioning the manner in which custody was continued, Muralidhar submitted that the trial court had refused bail on the ground that the chargesheet was yet to be filed, even though the chargesheet was submitted just four days later. “Investigation against everybody else is complete. This is so unfair,” he told the Bench.

The Court on Friday issued the notice, returnable within four weeks. When Muralidhar sought interim bail, Justice Nath declined the request, briefly responding, “No, no.” The matter is now listed for further consideration on January 19.

The FIR is based on a June 7, 2025 report submitted by a Special Investigation Team (SIT) probing the earlier NDPS case. The SIT alleged that Majithia and his wife accumulated assets worth over ₹540 crore disproportionate to their known sources of income through a complex web of domestic and overseas entities during his tenure as an MLA and Cabinet Minister between 2007 and 2017.

Before the high court, Majithia had contended that the corruption case was a continuation of the NDPS proceedings and was politically motivated. He also pointed out that a voluminous chargesheet running into around 40,000 pages, with 272 witnesses, had already been filed, making prolonged incarceration unjustified.

Rejecting these arguments, the high Court held that a second FIR was permissible where investigation disclosed a wider conspiracy or distinct offences, and observed that economic offences constituted a separate class of offences for bail. It further noted that Majithia’s release at this stage could affect the investigation and influence witnesses, though it directed the investigating agency to complete the remaining probe within three months.