CHANDIGARH, Aug. 27 — The privilege committee of the Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana (BCPH) has exonerated two senior advocates of the high court in the alleged “bench hunting” episode linked to a corruption case involving a Gurugram real estate developer and a former special CBI judge.
In its order dated August 21, the committee said no material had surfaced against senior advocates Puneet Bali and Rakesh Nehra, who were among 16 lawyers served notices on August 7. The names of their associates — Sauhard Singh, Rupender Singh, Bindu Tanwar, Ankit Yadav, Anmol Chandan, Gagandeep Singh and Aakash Sharma — were also cleared.
“Upon perusal of the records and replies submitted, the committee is of the considered view that further assistance from the two senior advocates is not required. No material has surfaced against them. On the contrary, both have extended full cooperation throughout, reflecting their commitment to transparency, integrity and the highest standards of professional ethics,” the committee recorded. It added that the reputation of both advocates and their associates remained “untarnished.”
The committee, chaired by Raj Kumar Chauhan, was formed on August 4 by BCPH chairman Rakesh Gupta after allegations surfaced that some advocates were attempting to secure favorable orders by having their cases listed before particular judges — a practice described as “bench hunting” or forum shopping.
While clearing the senior lawyers, the committee issued fresh notices to Delhi-based advocates Gulshan Sachdeva and Siddharth Bhardwaj, directing them to submit written responses and appear personally. Both had been engaged in cases concerning the Gurugram developer. “It is significant that the information relating to restriction of listing of certain advocates’ cases before particular benches is not in the public domain. Many of the advocates whose names appeared in such orders were themselves unaware of this fact. However, Gulshan and Bhardwaj were found to be surprisingly well aware of such restrictions,” the committee observed.
The panel also issued notice to another lawyer, Kunal Dawar, after finding him associated with a case filed by the developer.
These proceedings stem from a petition filed by M3M director Roop Bansal in April 2023, seeking to quash an FIR registered by the Haryana Anti-Corruption Bureau against himself, former special CBI judge Sudhir Parmar, and others under the Prevention of Corruption Act. Parmar was accused of showing undue favor to Bansal and other accused facing probes by the CBI and Enforcement Directorate.
Following complaints, then Chief Justice Sheel Nagu withdrew the matter from a judge and assigned it to himself. During open court hearings, the chief justice had orally referred to possible “bench hunting” before later recusing from the case. The matter is now being heard by Justice Manjari Nehru Kaul.
The BCPH committee had also sought responses from senior Supreme Court lawyers Abhishek Manu Singhvi and former Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi, stating their replies were necessary to “fairly and comprehensively adjudicate the matter.” The latest order, however, does not reference their submissions.
