Chandigarh: The Haryana government has informed the Punjab and Haryana high court that officers and officials caught red-handed in trap or raid cases and released on bail will not be posted at the same post or station, while those belonging to district cadres will be shifted to another distant station within the district. Taking note of the chief secretary’s affidavit detailing the transfer instructions, the high court made the state’s stand binding and disposed of a regular bail petition of an Haryana official.The directions were brought to the notice of the high court through an additional affidavit dated October 28, 2026, filed by Haryana chief secretary Anurag Rastogi, in a bail petition filed by Jora Singh.Justice Sumeet Goel, while disposing of the petition, directed that the state shall remain bound by the affidavit and warned that any deviation without prior permission of the competent court would invite penal consequences for the chief secretary and the concerned officers. The issue arose after the high court, in its order dated Aug 27, 2026, flagged concerns over public servants facing corruption trials being reinstated and posted in the same department, office or geographical jurisdiction connected with the criminal prosecution.The Bench had observed, “Time and again, this court has observed a deeply concerning trend wherein public servants, upon being enlarged on Anticipatory bail/Regular bail during the pendency of trial for offence(s) under the Prevention of Corruption Act, are usually reinstated into active service. This situation assumes an alarmingly prejudicial dimension when such reinstatement results repatriation/posting of the accused to the very same department, office or geographical jurisdiction that forms direct subject matter of ongoing criminal prosecution.”The high court had directed the chief secretary to file a comprehensive and detailed response outlining the framework, standards of procedure, service rules, regulations and guidelines governing the reinstatement of such public servants. It had specifically sought to know whether existing protocols mandated consultation with the prosecuting agency or the trial court before revoking a suspension and how the authority ordering reinstatement assessed the possibility of witness tampering or manipulation of records.In his additional affidavit, the chief secretary informed the court that the Haryana Government’s Vigilance Department had issued a letter dated October 27, 2026, regarding the transfer of officers and officials accused in trap and raid cases.The affidavit reproduced the government’s instructions, which state that officers and officials apprehended red-handed in trap or raid cases and released on bail “shall not be posted against the same post and in the same station”.Such officials “shall be transferred to a station away from the concerned jurisdiction, preferably beyond the adjoining boundary districts”. It further states that if an official belongs to a district cadre, “he/she shall be transferred to another distant station within the district”.The chief secretary stated in the affidavit that all concerned had been directed to ensure strict compliance with the instructions.Taking note of the affidavit, Justice Goel ordered, “The state shall remain bound by the additional affidavit (ibid) of the Chief Secretary, Haryana. Any deviation/ variation from the same, without prior permission of the concerned competent Court, shall, indubitably, invite penal consequences qua the Chief Secretary, Haryana/ concerned officer(s).”The directions were passed while deciding the regular bail petition of Jora Singh, who was booked in FIR No. 17 dated Dec 7, 2025, under Sections 7 and 7A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and Sections 61(2) and 308(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, at the State Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau police station, Panchkula.The petitioner was arrested on April 2, 2026, and the challan was presented on May 26, 2026. The prosecution had cited 28 witnesses, none of whom had been examined when the court granted him interim regular bail on Aug 27, 2026.The court noted that there was no allegation of misuse of the interim bail concession and made the interim regular bail order absolute.
