Chandigarh, July 3 — The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Thursday fixed July 4 for hearing a petition filed by Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) leader and former cabinet minister Bikram Singh Majithia, challenging his arrest and subsequent remand in a case registered by the Vigilance Bureau under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
The matter was adjourned by Justice Tribhuvan Dahiya’s Bench to allow Majithia’s counsel to place fresh remand orders on record. The former minister is currently in custody, with his remand having been extended by four days on Wednesday.
Filed through advocates Sartej Singh Narula, Damanbir Singh Sobti, and Arshdeep Singh Cheema, the petition contends that the FIR dated June 25, registered in Mohali, and the arrest carried out the same day were “patently illegal” and motivated by political vendetta.
Majithia alleged the arrest violated legal procedures and claimed he was kept in illegal custody for over two hours before the official arrest at 11:20 am — a violation of Article 22(2) of the Constitution and Section 187 of the BNSS. The custody, he said, was captured in multiple video recordings.
“The FIR and remand proceedings are part of a political witch-hunt to malign and harass me for being a vocal critic of the ruling party,” the petition read.
The remand application, Majithia argued, was vague and based on speculative claims such as his “alleged influence and foreign connections.” He claimed these were broad justifications lacking urgent investigative necessity, meant to pressure him into giving a confession — a violation of Article 20(3).
He also challenged the June 26 remand order, calling it “manifestly perverse,” lacking judicial reasoning, and in violation of procedural rules laid down by the High Court. The magistrate, he submitted, failed to record the required satisfaction after examining case diaries or justifying the need for police custody.
The petition also pointed out that the Supreme Court, in a March 4 order, had previously refused custodial interrogation in the same matter and had directed Majithia to cooperate with the SIT — which he claimed he fully did. Despite this, he alleged, the state secured fresh custody by concealing material facts.
“This petition raises serious questions regarding abuse of criminal process, the misuse of remand powers, and violations of fundamental rights under Articles 14, 20, and 21,” the plea stated, seeking quashing of the remand order and preventive directions against further misuse of process.
The court is expected to hear the matter in detail on Friday.
