Chandigarh: Suspended Punjab Police DIG Harcharan Singh Bhullar and his close aide Krishanu Sharda have opposed a plea seeking day-to-day trial in an ongoing corruption case. The application, filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation, was termed by the accused as “misconceived” and “premature” during proceedings before a special court in Chandigarh.
According to submissions made before the court, the defence argued that essential legal procedures are yet to be completed. They maintained that unless all necessary documents are supplied and due process is fully complied with, pushing for a daily hearing schedule would be unjustified and could compromise the integrity of the trial.
FCRF Academy Launches Premier Anti-Money Laundering Certification Program
Objection Raised Over Incomplete Chargesheet
In their response, the accused contended that the chargesheet filed by the prosecution is incomplete. The defence further alleged that complete and legible copies of documents relied upon by the prosecution have not yet been provided to them. Additionally, copies of documents not relied upon by the prosecution have also not been supplied.
The defence argued that such lapses violate the fundamental principles of a fair trial. Without access to all relevant documents, the accused would be unable to adequately prepare their defence, thereby affecting their legal rights.
Accused Say Legal Process Must Be Completed First
The defence informed the court that compliance with Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 230 has not yet been fully completed. Under this provision, the prosecution is required to supply all relevant documents and fulfil procedural obligations before the trial can proceed.
They argued that seeking a day-to-day trial without completing these steps amounts to undue haste and could undermine the judicial process.
Lawyers representing the accused stressed that the CBI’s application infringes upon the principles of a fair trial. They stated that conducting hearings on a daily basis would deprive the defence of sufficient time to prepare and present their case effectively.
It was also pointed out that the court has yet to determine whether charges can be formally framed in the matter. In such circumstances, the demand for expedited proceedings was described as premature.
Court to Decide on CBI’s Day-to-Day Trial Plea
The defence further highlighted that the accused are currently in judicial custody, which limits their ability to interact freely with their legal counsel. This constraint, they argued, makes it even more important to allow adequate time for preparation.
They emphasized that any hurried approach in conducting the trial could seriously prejudice the defence and hinder the presentation of facts before the court.
Another key argument raised by the defence was why the present case was being treated differently from other cases pending before the court. They pointed out that there has been no directive from higher courts mandating expedited proceedings in this matter.
The defence urged the court to follow established legal procedures and avoid creating a precedent where cases are fast-tracked without sufficient justification.
