The Punjab and Haryana High Court acted on the CBI report establishing on circumstantial evidence that SSP Ludhiana Sumedh Saini, an SP and two SHOs caused the disappearance of businessman [name withheld], his brother-in-law and his driver after they left for Ludhiana on 15 March 1994 following a High Court appearance. The Court directed the CBI challan to be filed before the CJM Ambala for fair trial and ordered Rs 2 lakh interim ex gratia each to the wives and children of a Ludhiana man and a Ludhiana man Suo motu contempt against two officers was discharged with observations kept off the criminal trial's merits. The Supreme Court in 2000 recast only the sanction direction as a duty to consider, leaving interim relief undisturbed. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.
This page documents a court-adjudicated case from the judgment and cited sources below. Findings are attributed to the court; this record does not add findings of its own.
How verification works →By judgment dated 14 September 1995 in Crl. Misc. No. 3052-M of 1994 and connected, the Punjab and Haryana High Court (Coram: V. K. Jhanji, J.) returned findings adverse to 4 police personnel, namely: Senior Superintendent of Police, Ludhiana, Punjab Police; Superintendent of Police, Punjab Police; Station House Officer, PS Kotwali, Ludhiana Police; Station House Officer, PS Focal Point, Ludhiana Police, and directed payment of compensation of Rs 4 lakh (Rs 4,00,000).
Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court judgment dated 14 September 1995 is the concluded position shown in the cited sources.
Reliable material supports a specifically documented fact relevant to that allegation, not necessarily the full allegation, causation, intent, unlawfulness, or responsibility.
Official finding: supports allegation.
Holding not recorded separately.
“In the light of the circumstantial evidence on record, it is established that Shri [name withheld], the then SSP Ludhiana, Shri [name withheld], SP, [name withheld] SHO PS Kotwali and [name withheld], SHO, P. S. Focal Point are responsible for …” (para 17 (CBI report para 91))
The Punjab and Haryana High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 400,000.
(Round-8 full re-verification: published record re-checked against the judgment text (outcome, officers, quote, key facts) plus methodology-compliance pass; skills-guided adversarial re-verification of the published record against the judgment text (reverify/t1-*/adversarial-8.jsonl))
Corrections (0): No corrections recorded.
Review: Solo Staff combined review (one combined attestation) — not yet recorded.
These records are listed together because they share a state or a topic. That does not mean they are connected.
