Chandigarh. During the hearing of a murder case at the Punjab and Haryana High Court, a revelation came to light that has raised serious questions regarding the entire investigative process. It emerged before the court that the Punjab Police had included the statement of an individual in their charge sheet who had passed away approximately four months prior to the date on which the alleged statement was recorded.
This sensational fact surfaced during the hearing of a murder case before the Punjab and Haryana High Court: the police had incorporated into their charge sheet the statement of a person who had already died nearly four months before the date on which the statement was purportedly recorded. Upon this revelation, the court refused to dismiss the matter as a mere procedural error; instead, making scathing observations regarding the functioning of the Punjab Police, the court questioned how a deceased individual could possibly provide a statement in police records at a later date.
The bench presided over by Justice Sumit Goel characterized this entire sequence of events as “obscure, inconceivable, and shocking to the judicial conscience,” stating that if the records are prima facie accurate, the matter cannot be construed as being limited merely to negligence.
The issue came to light during the hearing of an anticipatory bail plea filed by an accused in the murder case when the defense counsel apprised the court that the charge sheet submitted by the police contained an attached witness statement dated September 19, 2025—despite the fact that the very same witness had passed away on May 29, 2025. This impossible clash of dates compelled the court to intervene immediately. Given the gravity of the matter, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has directed the Special Director General of Police (Law and Order), Punjab, to personally investigate the entire episode and submit a detailed report, accompanied by an affidavit.
Furthermore, the Station House Officer (SHO) of the concerned police station has been directed to appear personally before the court—along with the case diary—at the next hearing, in order to clarify whether this was merely an administrative oversight, a manipulation of records, the fabrication of forged documents, or an indication of a deeper institutional flaw within the investigative process. Court States: Option to Hand Over Investigation to CBI Remains Open
Adopting a stern stance, the Court clarified that should the State Police fail to provide a satisfactory and credible response, the option of transferring the investigation of the case to the CBI remains open. The Court unequivocally stated that in a grave crime such as murder, any tampering with facts, documentary discrepancies, or compromise with the sanctity of the investigation will not be tolerated under any circumstances.
It was noted that this FIR was registered in Ludhiana in August 2025 under charges of murder and other serious penal sections; however, the integrity of the investigation itself has now emerged as an issue of even greater significance than the original crime. While scheduling the next hearing for May 18, the Punjab and Haryana High Court signaled that if tampering with records or fabrication is proven, severe punitive action against the concerned officials is to be considered inevitable.
