ED Opposes M3M Director Roop Bansal's Plea to Quash Corruption FIR in Bribery Case

Chandigarh, The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has opposed a plea by M3M Group Director Roop Bansal seeking the quashing of a corruption case registered against him for allegedly conspiring to bribe a trial court judge. The high-profile case, under investigation by the ED, has stirred legal and institutional scrutiny amid claims of procedural lapses and judicial recusals.

Roop Bansal is facing charges under Sections 7, 8, 11, and 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act (PCA) and Section 120-B (criminal conspiracy) of the IPC.

Bansal’s Argument: Lack of Sanction Invalidates Case

Bansal’s legal team, including Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, argued that the case should be quashed due to the absence of a mandatory sanction under Section 17A of the PCA, which they claim is required to prosecute the judge allegedly involved. They contended that a private individual like Bansal cannot be prosecuted for conspiracy unless the public servant (i.e., the judge) is also prosecuted with proper sanction.

ED’s Counter: Sanction Not Required for Private Individuals

Senior panel counsel Zoheb Hossain, appearing alongside Lokesh Narang for the ED, countered that sanction under Section 17A is applicable only to public servants, not private citizens. The ED emphasized that prosecution of Bansal for aiding and abetting offences under PCA and IPC Section 120-B remains valid, even if proceedings against the judge are stalled due to lack of sanction.

Judicial Developments and Adjournments

The plea is now being heard by Justice Manjari Nehru Kaul after Chief Justice Sheel Nagu recused himself citing administrative involvement and the need for impartiality. Justice Nagu had reassigned the case “to preserve the dignity and integrity of the institution.”

On Tuesday, the case was adjourned to July 30 for final arguments after Singhvi, appearing virtually, reported network issues.

A Timeline of Recusals and Reassignments

• Initially heard by Justice Anoop Chitkara in October 2023

• Reassigned to Justice NS Shekhawat, who recused in January 2024

• Heard and withdrawn before Justice Manjari Nehru Kaul

• Listed before Justice Mahabir Singh Sindhu, who reserved judgment for May 12

• On May 10, Chief Justice Nagu reassigned the matter to himself citing institutional interests

• On July 3, Chief Justice Nagu recused from hearing the matter again, leading to its reassignment to Justice Kaul

The prolonged litigation, marked by judicial recusals, administrative concerns, and legal technicalities, highlights the sensitivity and high stakes of corruption investigations involving judicial officers and corporate executives.