Listen To This Post

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday issued notice to the Punjab Vigilance Bureau on Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) leader Bikram Singh Majithia’s petition challenging the Punjab and Haryana High Court’s order denying him bail in a disproportionate assets case.

A Bench led by Justice Vikram Nath refused to grant interim bail to Majithia but sought a response from the Vigilance Bureau on his challenge to the High Court’s December 4 order. The matter has been posted for hearing on January 19.

The High Court had earlier dismissed Majithia’s bail plea, observing that the possibility of him influencing the investigation could not be ruled out. While directing the Vigilance Bureau to complete the probe within three months, the High Court had said Majithia could renew his bail plea thereafter.

Majithia was arrested by the Punjab Vigilance Bureau on June 25 in a disproportionate assets (DA) case, which allegedly involves the accumulation of assets worth ₹540 crore. The FIR in the DA case stems from an ongoing probe by a Punjab Police Special Investigation Team (SIT) into a 2021 drug case and was registered on the basis of an SIT report submitted in June 2025.

Currently lodged in New Nabha Jail, Patiala, Majithia had earlier been denied bail by a Mohali court in August. The Vigilance Bureau subsequently filed a voluminous chargesheet running into over 40,000 pages before the Mohali court on August 22.

Appearing for Majithia, senior advocate S. Muralidhar told the apex court that his client had earlier been granted bail in a case registered under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985, and that the Supreme Court had dismissed the Punjab government’s challenge to that bail order.

“In the NDPS case, the State filed a supplementary affidavit claiming it had unearthed evidence of money linked to the alleged offence. That very same financial transaction is now being used to foist a fresh case under the Prevention of Corruption Act,” Muralidhar argued.

In its December 4 order, the High Court had noted that Majithia was a prominent political figure who had served as a cabinet minister for over seven years and that the investigating agency had cited around 20 material witnesses, describing them as vulnerable.

“If the petitioner is released at this stage, the possibility of influencing the investigation, manipulating records and affecting witnesses cannot be ruled out,” the High Court had observed.

Majithia has consistently denied the allegations, calling the disproportionate assets case a result of “political witch-hunting and vendetta” for being a vocal critic of the current dispensation. He was earlier booked under the NDPS Act in 2021 based on a 2018 report of the anti-drug Special Task Force.