In a significant move to safeguard judicial integrity, Punjab and Haryana High Court Chief Justice Sheel Nagu withdrew a case from a single judge bench just hours before its scheduled judgment. This action followed the receipt of both oral and written complaints concerning the matter.
The corruption case, Roop Bansal v. State of Haryana, was initially heard and reserved by a single judge on May 2. However, complaints reached the Chief Justice between May 8 and 9, leaving limited time for deliberation. On May 10, Chief Justice Nagu exercised his administrative authority and withdrew the case, listing it before a new single bench led by himself on May 12.
"This matter has come up before this Single Bench comprising of the Chief Justice under certain disturbing circumstances..."
— Punjab & Haryana High Court Order
Explaining the urgency, Chief Justice Nagu stated the decision was made in the "interest of the institution" and to "protect the reputation" of the judge involved. He emphasized the Chief Justice’s exclusive authority over case allocation and reassignment, noting this power is beyond judicial scrutiny.
Read Also:- Allahabad High Court Allows Investigation Against Zubair Despite Tweets Appearing Within Free Speech
Senior counsel Mukul Rohtagi, along with Puneet Bali and Rakesh Nehra, objected to the reassignment, arguing that a bench that has heard and reserved a case should deliver the final order. The Chief Justice, however, disagreed.
"The Chief Justice is the master of the roster... The only course available to the Chief Justice in the limited reaction time, was to withdraw the heard and reserved case from the Single Bench...to be listed before another Single Bench."
— Chief Justice Sheel Nagu
Read Also:- Allahabad High Court Refuses To Cancel FIR Against Mohammed Zubair, Cites Need For Fair Investigation
The Chief Justice clarified that administrative powers include both the allocation and withdrawal of cases from any bench, even if the matter has already been heard and reserved. He pointed out that refusing such powers in reserved matters would nullify the purpose behind them.
"In such situations, the reputation of the Bench... is at stake. On the other hand is the overall reputation of the institution and public trust in the judicial system."
— Chief Justice Sheel Nagu
Read Also:- Supreme Court Seeks Centre’s Reply on Plea to Ban Betting Apps and Celebrity Endorsements
The court highlighted that the decision was necessary to bring closure to the controversy and prevent further embarrassment to the institution or the concerned judge. By taking this preventive step, the Chief Justice maintained that he upheld his constitutional oath and the trust placed in the judiciary.
"If the Chief Justice had not taken preventive emergent steps... then the Chief Justice would be failing in his duty and belying the oath taken by him."
— Punjab & Haryana High Court Order
Finally, the court overruled all objections to the reassignment and scheduled the case for hearing on merits on May 26, 2025.
Case Title: Roop Bansal v. State of Haryana
Counsel for Petitioner: Mukul Rohtagi, Puneet Bali, Rakesh Nehra, and others
Counsel for State: Mr. Deepak Balyan, Addl. Advocate General, Haryana
Counsel for ED: Mr. Zoheb Hussain with Mr. Lokesh Narang
