High Court Seeks SP’s Affidavit on Probe into Alleged ₹20-Lakh FSL Bribery Case

Gurugram: The Punjab and Haryana High Court has directed Haryana Police to submit a detailed affidavit explaining the progress of its investigation into an alleged bribery case linked to the procurement of RT-PCR and DNA kits for the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) at Madhuban.

Justice Sumeet Goel issued the direction on September 15 while hearing a criminal writ petition filed by Dr Rajiv Kawatra, Assistant Director (DNA) at FSL Madhuban. The court issued a notice of motion for October 8 and specified that the state’s response should be filed through an affidavit by the superintendent of police concerned.

The petition has sought the transfer of the investigation either to the Central Bureau of Investigation or to a Special Investigation Team working under court supervision. It has alleged shortcomings as well as an undue delay in the investigation.

The case dates back to September 6, 2023, when the Anti-Corruption Bureau’s Karnal unit registered an FIR following an inquiry into allegations of corruption in the procurement of forensic laboratory kits.

Those named in the FIR include Dr Anita Kadian, who was then Deputy Director at the Judicial Scientific Laboratory in Madhuban; Neeraj Goud, Director of New Delhi-based Mygene Life Solutions; Buj Singh, the company’s Operations Sales Manager; and Chandraman Chaudhary of Thermo Fisher Scientific in Gurugram.

They were booked under Sections 7, 8 and 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, along with Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, which relates to criminal conspiracy.

According to the allegations recorded in the FIR, a bribe of ₹20 lakh was demanded in connection with the procurement process, of which ₹11 lakh was purportedly paid. Investigators reportedly examined audio and video recordings of conversations involving company representatives and other individuals associated with the purchase of the kits.

The recordings referred to in the FIR allegedly contained discussions about money being delivered to “Madam” and identified Kadian. However, the accusations remain unproven and no finding of guilt has been recorded by a court.

Before the FIR was registered, committees headed by senior police officers had reportedly examined statements from the complainant, laboratory officials and company representatives, besides analysing the recordings and other available material.

Kawatra’s petition has questioned why the investigation has not resulted in a final report despite the passage of nearly three years. It has also claimed that the ACB had earlier opposed Kadian’s anticipatory-bail plea and sought her custodial interrogation. These contentions are part of the petitioner’s case and are yet to be answered by the state.

The petition has further alleged that delays and irregularities in procuring forensic kits affected laboratory operations, with possible consequences for the processing of evidence in criminal cases, including cases involving sexual offences.

The High Court has also directed the station house officer concerned, through the state counsel, to inform Kadian about the pending petition and the next hearing. A compliance report confirming that the direction has been carried out must also be filed.

At this stage, the court has neither transferred the investigation nor reached any conclusion regarding the allegations or the reasons for the delay. The case will be heard next on October 8, when Haryana Police is expected to place its response before the court.