Supreme Court to Hear Majithia’s Bail Plea in Disproportionate Assets Case, Declines Interim Relief

New Delhi, December 19, 2025: The Supreme Court on Friday agreed to examine a plea filed by Shiromani Akali Dal leader Bikram Singh Majithia challenging the Punjab and Haryana High Court’s decision denying him bail in a disproportionate assets case.

A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and N V Anjaria issued notice to the Punjab government and fixed the matter for hearing on January 19. The court, however, refused to grant Majithia interim bail at this stage.

Majithia had approached the apex court after the Punjab and Haryana High Court, on December 4, rejected his bail application, citing the possibility that he could influence the ongoing investigation if released. The high court had directed the Punjab Vigilance Bureau to complete its probe within three months and observed that Majithia would be at liberty to seek bail after the investigation concludes.

During the hearing before the Supreme Court, senior advocate S Muralidhar, representing Majithia, argued that his client had earlier been granted bail in a case registered under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, and that the apex court had dismissed the Punjab government’s challenge to that order.

Muralidhar submitted that in the NDPS case, the state had relied on alleged money transactions through a supplementary affidavit, and the same set of transactions has now been used to register a fresh case against Majithia under the Prevention of Corruption Act. He contended that this amounted to a misuse of legal process.

Majithia was arrested by the Punjab Vigilance Bureau on June 25 in connection with the disproportionate assets case, which allegedly involves the accumulation of assets worth around ₹540 crore. The FIR is linked to an investigation arising from a 2021 drug-related case being probed by a special investigation team of the Punjab Police.

In its earlier order, the high court had noted that Majithia is a senior political leader in Punjab who has served as a cabinet minister for over seven years. It observed that the investigating agency had cited around 20 material witnesses and described them as vulnerable, raising concerns about possible influence.

The high court had further stated that releasing Majithia at this stage could result in tampering with records related to suspicious financial transactions or exerting pressure on witnesses, thereby affecting the probe.

Before the high court, Majithia’s counsel had argued that the FIR in the disproportionate assets case was unlawfully registered and aimed solely at keeping him in custody. The defence had also maintained that the companies and entities named in the FIR had already been examined during the NDPS investigation, where the alleged assets and cash deposits were described by the Vigilance Bureau as proceeds of drug-related activities.