Chandigarh, May 8 (IANS) The Punjab government on Friday informed the High Court that no coercive action would be taken against Rajya Sabha member Sandeep Pathak without prior notice to the court.​

The Punjab and Haryana High Court was hearing a petition moved by Pathak, who switched loyalties from the Aam Aadmi Party to the Bharatiya Janata Party, citing media reports that said two First Information Reports had been registered against him but that he had not been furnished with the details.​

Pathak’s counsel, R.S. Rai, told the court that his client was elected to the Rajya Sabha from Punjab in April 2022 on an Aam Aadmi Party ticket and recently switched political allegiance along with six other Upper House members from Punjab.​

He said newspaper reports stated that the Punjab Police had registered two First Information Reports against Pathak, but neither their numbers, dates, police stations, nor the nature of the allegations had been disclosed.​

“I am fundamentally only asking that if there is a First Information Report, give me a copy. I will take my recourse in law that is available to me,” Rai told the High Court.​

He added that Pathak had already written to the Director General of Police seeking information about the cases, but had received no reply.​

The matter will be listed for the next hearing on Monday before Chief Justice Sheel Nagu’s Bench.​

Opposing the petition as “speculative” and based on newspaper reports, Additional Advocate General Chanchal K. Singla said the petition was not maintainable and could not be entertained.​

He said the petitioner was effectively seeking blanket anticipatory bail without disclosing any offence or First Information Report particulars.​

He said that any case registered against the petitioner could be provided only after inquiries were made with all districts.​

“Naturally, we will enquire. We will seek information from all the districts, because he has disclosed nothing,” he said.​

However, the petitioner’s counsel argued that the government could not “play hide-and-seek” over the existence of criminal proceedings.​

“Why should the state want to play hide-and-seek mode and not tell me there is a First Information Report? You go ahead and seek whatever remedy you have,” he said, contending that Pathak apprehended sudden police action.​

–IANS

vg/dan

​