Supreme Court Issues Notice On CBI Challenge To HC's Clean Chit To Bhupinder Hooda & AJL In Panchkula Land Allotment Case
Hey there! This news about the Supreme Court and Bhupinder Hooda is a classic CLAT scenario, testing your understanding of criminal law and judicial processes. So, the CBI is challenging a High Court order that gave a clean chit to former Haryana CM Bhupinder Hooda and AJL (publishers of National Herald) in a land allotment case. The CBI alleges Hooda illegally restored a plot to AJL in Panchkula at an old price, causing loss to the state. The High Court, however, said the re-allotment was valid. For CLAT, remember this involves Sections 120-B (criminal conspiracy) and 420 (cheating) of the IPC, plus the Prevention of Corruption Act. It's about how investigating agencies and courts interpret legality. Bottom line for the exam: understand the roles of the CBI, High Court, and Supreme Court, and how different interpretations of law can lead to appeals. It's a great example of the checks and balances in our legal system.
The Supreme Court yesterday (May 4) issued notice in theCentral Bureau of Investigation's (CBI) plea challenging thePunjab and Haryana High Court's recent ordergiving a clean chit to theformer Chief Minister of Haryana, Bhupinder Singh Hooda, and theAssociated Journals Limited(AJL), which publishes the Congress newspaper National Herald, for alleged allotment of land in Panchkula to AJL.
Solicitor General of India Tushar MehtaandAdditional Solicitor General SV Rajuappeared for the CBI before a bench comprisingJustice Dipankar Datta and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma. The bench issued notice, returnable July.
By an order dated February 25,Justice Tribhuvan Dahiyaof the High Court held that the re-allotment of land is valid and it has neither been declared illegal nor has it been cancelled. It said that the CBI took it upon itself to term the re-allotment illegal and questioned how an investigating agency could do so.
The CBI has alleged that AJL was allotted a plot in Panchkula in 1982 on the basis of 'No Profit No Loss' by Haryana Urban Development Authority ('HUDA'). However, since no construction took place there for 10 years, HUDA took back possession of the plot.
Further, it has been claimed that in the year 2005, a recommendation was made by Hooda (then CM of Haryana) that the same plot be restored to AJL at the original price, along with interest due up to the date of restoration of allotment.
It was argued that after a recommendation in favour of AJL, the same was placed before the meeting of the HUDA Authority, which had raised certain reservations that the plot may be re-allotted either on the market price or by way of advertising and allowing AJL to participate in the same.
However, when the meeting took place, the officials did not place any such objection regarding restoration of the plot to the AJL and its request for restoration of the allotment of institution plot was approved by the 'Authority' without there being any objection raised by any of the member.
CBI concluded that the accused persons, Hooda, Sh. Moti Lal Vohra (since deceased) and the AJL, in conspiracy with each other, have misused the official position in re-allotment of the plot and thereby caused wrongful loss to the State exchequer and wrongful gain to the respondents.
In April 2021, the special court framed charges against the accused under Sections 120-B (party to criminal conspiracy) and 420 (cheating) of the IPC and Section 13 (2) r/w S. 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Case Details: CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION v BHUPINDER SINGH HOODA AND ANR.|SLP(Crl) No.7634-7635/2026
Appearances: For Petitioner(s) :Mr. Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General Mr. Suryaprakash V. Raju, A.S.G. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Adv. Mr. Annam Venkatesh, Adv. Ms. Sairica S Raju, Adv. Ms. Astha Singh, Adv. Mr. Aman Mehta, Adv