The Supreme Court on Tuesday, 15 September 2026, strongly indicated it may dismiss the bail application of suspended Punjab Police Deputy Inspector General (DIG) Harcharan Singh Bhullar, who is in custody in a bribery case being investigated by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). The bench's remarks signal deepening judicial scepticism toward Bhullar's repeated attempts to secure release.

What the Supreme Court Said

A bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice V. Mohana heard the matter before adjourning it for four weeks. The adjournment came after Bhullar's counsel informed the court that the complainant and a key material witness had yet to be examined. The counsel also sought permission to examine two shadow witnesses.

CJI Surya Kant made his displeasure unambiguous, remarking: '100 per cent case of dismissal! You want to dismiss it now or later?' The court stated it would take up the bail plea only after the relevant witnesses have been examined. The next hearing has been scheduled for 27 October.

Background: A Chain of Bail Rejections

Bhullar has been in custody since 16 October 2025, when he was arrested in Chandigarh following a trap operation by the CBI. This marks his third significant attempt at bail across multiple courts, each resulting in rejection.

The Punjab and Haryana High Court had dismissed his second successive bail petition on 10 August, with Justice Manish Batra observing there was no 'drastic or substantive change' in circumstances since the earlier dismissal. The High Court also rejected his argument that the CBI lacked jurisdiction, holding that as an Indian Police Service (IPS) officer working under Central government control, his posting in Punjab did not limit the CBI's authority to investigate.

The Corruption Allegations Against Bhullar

The case originates from a complaint filed by businessman Akash Batta, who alleged that Bhullar — then posted as DIG, Ropar Range — had demanded illegal gratification through a co-accused named Krishanu in exchange for not taking coercive action against his business in a criminal matter and for ensuring favourable treatment.

According to the prosecution, conversations between Bhullar and Krishanu were covertly recorded during the CBI's preliminary verification. One such recording allegedly captured Bhullar directing Krishanu to collect ₹8 lakh from the complainant. During the trap laid on 16 October 2025, Krishanu was allegedly caught accepting ₹5 lakh from Batta as part of the gratification purportedly demanded by Bhullar. Both men were arrested the same day.

Why Courts Have Refused Bail

The High Court, while refusing bail, observed that the allegations — supported by recorded conversations, the verification report, and the trap proceedings — 'prima facie make out a case for demand of gratification, direction or collection of the part of the same through the co-accused Krishanu.'

The court further held that the absence of a direct recovery from Bhullar was not material, since Krishanu had allegedly accepted the money on his behalf. Crucially, the High Court cited a 'reasonable apprehension' of witness intimidation given Bhullar's seniority within the police hierarchy. 'There exists a reasonable apprehension that he may attempt to influence witnesses, tamper with witness or otherwise obstruct the course of proceedings,' the High Court had stated.

What Happens Next

The Supreme Court has listed the matter for 27 October, by which time witnesses are expected to have been examined. Given the court's unambiguous oral remarks, Bhullar faces a steep challenge in securing relief. The case also carries broader significance for accountability within senior police ranks, particularly in cases where CBI jurisdiction over IPS officers has been contested.