Senior Haryana IPS officer files ₹1 Cr defamation suit against judge

A senior IPS officer from the Haryana government has filed a defamation suit against an additional district and sessions judge, seeking ₹1 crore in damages and compensation. The officer has filed the suit against adverse remarks made against him in a judicial order passed in February 2022, officials said. The suit was filed in a Gurugram court on Monday, with a hearing held the same day.

According to the ordersheet uploaded on Wednesday, the court while registering the suit against the judge, currently posted in another district, kept the matter for next hearing on November 21 to consider point of maintainability of the suit. The ordersheet further mentioned that the plaintiff have sought for permanent prohibitory injunction in his favour and for restraining the judge from maligning and defaming him in any manner, in addition to the monetary compensation.

The defamation case stems from a bail hearing for another IPS officer who was involved in a multi-crore heist case in Gurugram. The bail hearing, held in February 2022, led the judge to raise questions about the petitioner, the senior IPS officer, who was then part of the Gurugram police commissionerate as a senior officer. The judge had criticised the officer’s supervision and decision-making, particularly for giving dual charge of deputy commissioner of police (crime) and DCP (south) to the DCP involved in the case.

During the hearing, the judge questioned the IPS officer’s oversight, specifically how gangsters and the heist kingpins could visit the DCP’s office with bribe money without the officer’s knowledge, as their chambers were adjacent. These observations were included in the bail order and subsequently reported in the media.

The multi-crore heist case involved the DCP allegedly accepting a ₹2.5 crore bribe at his office in the Gurugram police commissionerate. An FIR had been registered under various sections of the Indian Penal Code at Kherki Daula police station on August 21, 2021. The DCP’s bail pleas were twice rejected, and when his third attempt for anticipatory bail was also denied on February 14, 2022, the judge’s critical comments against the commissioner were included in the ruling.

The senior IPS officer, after facing public and media scrutiny following the publication of these remarks, moved to the Punjab and Haryana High Court last year. In August 2023,high court expunged the adverse remarks, stating that the IPS officer had not been given an opportunity to respond to the comments and that there was no substantial evidence to justify the disparaging remarks. “There was further no opportunity granted to the petitioner, and also there was no material available on record so as to substantiate or justify the recording of the said disparaging remarks,” the court order read.

The officer’s counsel, Parvesh Yadav, declined to comment on the case when contacted by HT.

In the defamation suit, the senior officer argued that the judge’s remarks were based on conjecture and had no judicial basis. He stated that the comments regarding his supposed lack of knowledge about the events were personal in nature and unrelated to the adjudication of the bail application. The petition also claimed that the comments were not protected under the Judges Protection Act since they did not pertain to the judge’s official duties.