High Court Puts Brakes on SC Panel Chief's Intervention in Warring Probe

In a significant development that adds another layer to Punjab's intricate political drama, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has effectively put the brakes on any external interference in the ongoing investigation against Congress MLA Raja Warring. This ruling specifically targets Vijay Sampla, the Chairman of the National Commission for Scheduled Castes (NCSC), explicitly restraining him from getting involved in the police probe. It's a move that certainly has people talking and underlines the boundaries of institutional roles.

This whole saga, you see, began when an FIR was lodged against Warring. The accusation? Allegedly making 'casteist remarks' aimed squarely at Punjab Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann and Assembly Speaker Kultar Singh Sandhwan. The FIR, filed under the stringent Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, specifically Section 3(1)(u), is being handled by the Rupnagar police. It’s a serious charge, no doubt about it, carrying significant implications for any public figure.

Now, here's where things got a bit... complicated. Mr. Sampla, leading the NCSC, decided to step into the fray. He started issuing notices – not just to the Punjab Chief Secretary and the Director General of Police, but also directly to Warring himself. He demanded reports, and even, believe it or not, insisted on personal appearances from the Chief Secretary and DGP at the commission's office in Chandigarh. This certainly raised some eyebrows, appearing to go beyond the commission's typical advisory or monitoring role and delve into the operational aspects of a live police investigation.

Naturally, the Punjab government wasn't too pleased with this perceived overreach. They wasted no time in knocking on the High Court's door, filing a petition to challenge Sampla's rather assertive actions. Their argument was clear: the NCSC, despite its crucial mandate to protect the rights of Scheduled Castes, shouldn't be interfering with an active police investigation, especially when the matter is already sub judice – meaning it's under judicial consideration and being handled by law enforcement as per established procedures.

And the High Court agreed, at least for now. During a recent hearing, Justice Vinod S Bhardwaj heard the government's plea and promptly granted them interim relief. The court observed that the NCSC’s actions seemed to be encroaching upon the police's domain. It specifically questioned the commission's jurisdiction to summon top officials and demand detailed reports when a formal police investigation, guided by legal procedures and precedents, was already underway. The order clearly states that Mr. Sampla, in his capacity as NCSC chief, cannot intervene in or influence the ongoing police probe into the FIR against Warring, ensuring the investigative process remains untainted by external pressure.

So, what's the next chapter in this unfolding story? The High Court has set May 14, 2024, as the date for the next hearing. Until then, the police are free to continue their investigation without Sampla's directives, allowing them to gather evidence and proceed according to law. It’s a clear message about the separation of powers and roles, ensuring that investigations proceed unimpeded and within their proper constitutional frameworks. This ruling underscores a vital principle: while constitutional bodies have their important duties, they must also respect the established legal framework and investigative processes that govern the administration of justice.