Punjab and Haryana High Court seeks Punjab DGP response on IPS officer's 'sex-for-cash' audio clip

The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Monday asked the Punjab government to respond to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition seeking a forensic investigation into certain viral audio recordings purportedly revealing a senior police officer seeking sexual favors from women..The Bench of Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sumeet Goel asked the State Chief Secretary and Director General of Police (DGP) to file an affidavit in response to the plea.However, the Court did not issue a formal notice in the case filed by advocate Nikhil Saraf after the State objected to the maintainability of the PIL. "The objection of locus raised by the State counsel shall remain open to be argued on the next date but only after affidavit is filed," the Court said..Saraf argued that the viral audio recordings "point to an officer engaged in prostitution, trafficking, and sexual abuse" and prayed for a report from the Central Forensic Science Laboratory. He sought disclosure of the name of the officers allegedly heard in the call recordings."This Public Interest Litigation brings to light serious institutional failures in investigating allegations that have major implications for police accountability and gender justice in Punjab. The case focuses on two audio recordings that, on the face of it, point to an officer engaged in prostitution, trafficking, and sexual abuse, and to a separate event that sheds light on possible links between police officers and the drug trade in the state."Saraf told the Court despite representations, the authorities had failed to probe the audio recordings. As per the petition,"Although complaints were submitted to legal oversight bodies like the Police Complaints Authority and the Punjab State Women's Commission, these were either dismissed on procedural grounds or ignored altogether. The most troubling development came when a Judicial Magistrate First Class in Ludhiana passed a one-sided order to suppress the audio recordings, without any forensic review, without hearing the other side, and without having proper jurisdiction. This resulted in censorship rather than verification."Pertinently, a single-judge of the High Court had on April 24 stayed the judicial magistrate's gag order. Today, the Division Bench also appeared to agree that the magistrate had passed the order beyond her jurisdiction. .Appearing for Saraf in the PIL heard today, Advocate Amit Sharma said the petitioner was only seeking an investigation. "It is a systemic pattern. This Hon'ble bench has said that there is a sorry state of affairs with Punjab Police. There are rape cases, murders - they don't register FIRs. This particular commissioner (IPS officer) was penalized... ₹1 Lakh cost was imposed because he tried to suppress an investigation," he added. However, the Court said the petitioner can approach a magistrate for registration of a First Information Report (FIR) in the matter. In response, Sharma said the petitioner had written to various authorities but to no avail. The counsel also highlighted the influence of the IPS officer, stating that he was calling himself an "encounter specialist"."He is a guy who is not .... judicial magistrate passed a gag order on day one. There are judicial orders in front of you, they [police] don't register FIRs," he submitted. .Ultimately, the Court at this stage agreed to seek an affidavit from the State Chief Secretary and the DGP.