New Delhi, Jan 19 (UNI) The Supreme Court on Monday suggested that Shiromani Akali Dal leader Bikram Singh Majithia be shifted to a jail in Chandigarh while hearing his plea seeking interim bail on the ground that he apprehended threat to his life.
“We are saying shift him to Chandigarh jail, what is the problem?” remarked Justice Sandeep Mehta during the hearing.
A bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta was hearing Majithia’s petition. On the issue of an alleged threat to life, Justice Mehta queried how many attempts had been made on Majithia since he was taken into custody.
Senior Advocate Gaurav Aggarwal, appearing for Majithia, urged the court to grant interim bail, submitting that there was a genuine threat, as reflected in the state’s own intelligence report dated January 3.
In response to a specific query from the bench, Aggarwal said Majithia has been lodged in Nabha jail since June 2025.
During the hearing, Justice Mehta observed, “Rs 540 crore of public money (is involved),” to which Aggarwal responded that, as per the chargesheet, the allegation pertained to around Rs 40 crore.
Senior Advocate Siddharth Dave, appearing for the state, sought time to file a response. He informed the court that the Punjab and Haryana High Court was already seized of the issue and that the state had assured the High Court that all necessary steps were being taken to ensure Majithia’s safety.
The matter was adjourned, granting time to the state to file a counter-affidavit. Before parting, the bench observed that Majithia’s request for interim bail would be considered on the next date of hearing.
Majithia has approached the Supreme Court challenging a Punjab and Haryana High Court order, which dismissed his bail plea in an FIR registered by the Punjab Vigilance Bureau under Sections 13(1)(b) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
Notice on the plea was issued by the Supreme Court in December 2025.
The FIR was registered on the basis of a June 7, 2025, report of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) probing an earlier NDPS case against Majithia.
The SIT alleged that Majithia and his wife had accumulated assets worth over Rs 540 crore, disproportionate to their known sources of income, through a network of domestic and foreign entities.
The allegations pertain to the period between 2007 and 2017, when Majithia served as a member of the Legislative Assembly and later as a Cabinet minister in Punjab.
The state has alleged that he exercised direct or indirect control over several companies, including Saraya Industries Limited and its subsidiaries, and that unexplained cash deposits, foreign investments routed through Cyprus- and Singapore-based entities, and inter-corporate transactions were used to acquire assets and benami properties.
It was also alleged that Majithia misused his official position to build business interests in the liquor, transport, and aviation sectors through family members and front entities.
Before the High Court, Majithia had contended that the corruption case was an offshoot of the NDPS case in which he was granted bail in August 2022, and that the Supreme Court had dismissed the state’s plea for cancellation of that bail in April 2025.
He argued that the same material could not form the basis of a fresh FIR and alleged political motivation behind the prosecution.
He also pointed out that the investigation was complete, with a chargesheet filed on August 22, 2025, comprising nearly 40,000 pages and citing 272 witnesses.
Rejecting these submissions, the High Court held that there was no legal bar on registration of a second FIR when investigation discloses a larger conspiracy or distinct offences.
Relying on Supreme Court precedent, it observed that economic offences form a separate class for the purpose of bail.
The High Court further noted that the allegations pointed to deep-rooted financial conspiracies with serious implications for the state’s financial health, and that release at that stage could hamper further investigation and influence witnesses.
While declining bail, the High Court had directed the investigating agency to complete the remaining investigation within three months and observed that Majithia could seek bail thereafter, noting that he could not be kept in custody indefinitely.
