Allegations of Advocate Demanding ₹5.45 Lakh for Bribing Government Pleader and Judge Cannot Be Brushed Aside: Punjab & Haryana High Court Orders CBI Probe into Threat and Corruption Claims

"Integrity of the Bench and the Bar Is Not a Private Dispute—It Concerns the Whole Institution":  Punjab and Haryana High Court delivered a significant ruling that pierces through the veil of a routine protection plea and exposes a far deeper malaise within the justice delivery system. A petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by Ankush Dhanerwal, a practicing advocate, seeking protection of life and liberty from alleged threats by his former clients, ultimately resulted in the matter being referred to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for a thorough inquiry into alarming allegations of professional misconduct and corruption that may implicate members of the legal profession and possibly judicial officers.

Justice Sandeep Moudgil, presiding over the case, observed that what began as a personal security plea had unveiled facts that "go beyond the ambit of individual grievances and strike at the foundational integrity of the legal system."

The Petition Was Not Just About Threats, It Was About the Ethics of the Bar

The petitioner, Advocate Ankush Dhanerwal, approached the Court asserting that he faced life-threatening intimidation from Respondents No.5 and 6, former clients dissatisfied with the outcome of a panchayat election matter he had handled. The advocate alleged that he was subjected to repeated threats, including being confronted at his home with deadly weapons and even harassed within the High Court Bar Library premises.

As per the Court’s direction, the Senior Superintendents of Police, Mohali and Chandigarh, were instructed to examine the petitioner's complaints dated 02.06.2025 and 23.07.2025, and act on the petitioner’s apprehension to life and liberty.

However, it was during the inquiry initiated by Chandigarh Police that the real storm broke.

"He Demanded ₹5.45 Lakh to Be Paid to a Government Pleader and a Judge" — Former Client’s Statement Stuns the Court

The statement recorded from Respondent No.6, submitted during the inquiry proceedings, laid out in chilling detail the financial transactions with the petitioner. The Court reproduced the client’s version, which included a specific assertion:

"Ankush Dhanerwal, Advocate told us that he will again re-file appeal before the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court and would get an order… for which he had demanded a fee of ₹5,45,000/- to be paid to the Government Pleader as well as the Judge."

This was not an offhand accusation. The statement was signed, detailed the dates, amounts paid, and even the digital trail of Google Pay transactions totalling ₹2.60 lakh, in addition to earlier cash payments. The client also claimed that the petitioner failed to appear in the contempt proceedings (COCP No. 989 of 2025), which led to its dismissal, and that repeated requests for a refund were met with intimidation.

Court Questions Systemic Integrity: “The Allegations Go Beyond Personal Threats”

Upon reviewing the material placed before it, the High Court concluded that the allegations raised not just questions about the professional conduct of an individual advocate but threatened the sanctity of the justice system itself.

Justice Moudgil remarked: "Such allegations, if true, are not merely violations of individual ethical obligations but impinge on the institutional integrity of the Bench and the Bar—two sides of the same coin in the justice delivery mechanism."

He further added: "We cannot ignore the troubling similarity between this case and a recent FIR registered by the CBI ACB, Chandigarh, against another advocate, Jatin Salwan, for allegedly accepting a bribe in the name of a Judicial Officer. The present matter, therefore, cannot be dismissed as isolated or personal."

Referral to CBI Becomes Inevitable: “This Demands an Independent and Transparent Inquiry”

Given the gravity of the allegations and the potential institutional implications, the Court observed that an independent agency is best placed to unearth the truth. Justice Moudgil ruled:

"This Court finds it appropriate to refer the entire matter to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for an effective and thorough investigation. The complexity and sensitivity of the allegations, from threats to alleged corruption, necessitate a neutral and competent probe."

In a clear and unequivocal direction, the Court ordered the CBI to take immediate cognizance, investigate all aspects, including the source of the funds, the nature of alleged bribery demands, and the validity of the threats alleged by the petitioner. The Court also directed all state authorities to extend full cooperation.

Mr. Prateek Gupta, counsel appearing for the CBI, accepted notice in court and was directed to ensure that a detailed report is submitted within a stipulated timeframe.

The Court Ends the Petition—but Leaves a Stark Warning

Disposing of the writ petition, the Court clarified that its direction was not limited to merely protecting the petitioner. The judgment concluded with an unmistakable tone of institutional concern:

"The Bench and Bar form the twin foundations of a democratic judicial structure. A crack in either is a crack in the entire edifice. This Court cannot allow such allegations to fester unexamined."

In a time when the legal profession is increasingly facing public scrutiny, this judgment stands out for its willingness to pull no punches when the reputation of the judicial process itself is perceived to be under threat.

Date of Decision: 22.08.2025