CHANDIGARH: The Enforcement Directorate has filed its reply before the Punjab and Haryana High Court in a public interest petition alleging corruption, abuse of official position and manipulation of governmental and administrative processes in Punjab, placing on record a series of communications with the Punjab Police and a substantial body of supporting material.
Punjab Today has accessed and examined a copy of the ED’s reply and its annexures. The filing assumes particular significance because it places before the High Court not only the ED’s correspondence with Punjab authorities but also electronic records and the statement of Nitin Gohal recorded under Section 17 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
The PIL, CWP-PIL-238 of 2026, Nikhil Saraf versus State of Punjab and Others, has been filed by advocate Nikhil Saraf, who is appearing in person. The petition raises allegations concerning corruption, abuse of official position, criminal conspiracy and alleged manipulation of governmental, tender and administrative processes, with allegations involving persons connected with the Chief Minister’s Office.
Punjab And Haryana High Court
The High Court had on August 27 directed the ED to place before it the relevant communications sent to the Punjab DGP and sought the State’s response on what action had been taken on the material.
The Division Bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Rohit Kapoor observed that the nature of the allegations was serious and required a careful response.
The matter is listed for hearing on September 3.
What makes the ED’s latest filing particularly significant is that the annexed material includes Gohal’s own statement containing questions about Rajbir Singh Ghuman, OSD to the Punjab Chief Minister, transfer and posting requests, his alleged links with persons seeking government interventions, and the forwarding of some requests to the CMO.
The statement also contains questions about the exchange of a government policy document relating to Foodgrains Labour & Cartage 2024, with Gohal acknowledging during questioning that neither he nor the person to whom he forwarded the document was authorised to access, review or suggest changes to a confidential government document.
The ED’s filing therefore places before the High Court a substantially fuller body of material than the allegations contained in the PIL alone.
ED puts correspondence with Punjab Police before High Court
The ED’s latest filing follows the High Court’s August 27 direction that the agency place on record the communications allegedly sent to the Punjab DGP and indicate what action had followed.
The reply places on record a series of communications and supporting documents, beginning with the ED’s communication under Section 66(2) of the PMLA dated July 30, 2026, followed by an ED report dated July 31 and further correspondence dated August 7. The filing also contains a tracking report, a reminder email and subsequent communications exchanged with the Punjab Bureau of Investigation.
According to the ED’s reply, a letter dated August 28 from the AIG (Investigation), Punjab Bureau of Investigation, sought further information in connection with registration of an FIR, including information concerning the investigating officer.
The ED says it responded on August 31 and submitted the response through email as well as in person on September 1. Along with the response, the agency supplied legible copies of the relevant material, a certificate under Section 63 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, the statement of Nitin Gohal recorded under Section 17 of the PMLA and other relevant records.
Significantly, the ED’s reply states that it had not received any intimation regarding registration of an FIR.
The agency has now asked the High Court to take its communications and supporting material on record and issue appropriate directions for a “free, fair and impartial investigation.”
This correspondence trail is central to the present proceedings because the petition filed by advocate Nikhil Saraf has alleged, among other things, corruption relating to transfers and postings, favourable policy decisions, tenders and other government processes. The High Court has sought the State’s response to the allegations.
What the electronic record shows
The ED’s material includes WhatsApp communications concerning a range of government-related requests.
Among the communications examined by the agency are messages concerning the transfer of officers, including DSP Rajan Parminder, Amarjit Singh, a DGM in Mohali, and other government officials, as well as a request concerning reconsideration of the suspension of jail superintendent Manjit Singh Tiwana.
Another exchange concerns Sangeet Kumar, Executive Officer, Municipal Council Sirhind, with a request for his transfer to an ADC Urban Development office.
The electronic material also contains communications concerning government tenders, licensing and policy matters. These include messages relating to Verka/Milkfed’s SAP user licence, re-tendering, a hospital licence and changes in tender terms and conditions.
The ED has also relied upon an exchange concerning the “State Policies for Foodgrains Labour & Cartage 2024”.
These communications are being presented as investigative material by the ED. They are not findings of guilt, and their evidentiary value and the allegations arising from them remain matters for investigation and adjudication.
The ED has earlier alleged that its investigation identified 61 instances of suspected wrongdoing, including matters relating to transfers and postings, policy decisions, tenders and other government functions.
According to the agency, 21 officers’ names figured in connection with alleged transfer/posting activity, while 11 instances allegedly involved payments, kickbacks or other benefits totalling ₹89.55 lakh, apart from alleged hawala transactions.
Electronic trail and Gohal statement deepen CMO questions
One of the most significant new elements in the ED filing is the inclusion of Nitin Gohal’s statement recorded under Section 17 of the PMLA.
The statement runs to 23 pages and covers Gohal’s personal, professional and financial affairs, but its later portion contains questions directly relevant to the alleged transfer-posting network.
In one of the questions, the ED confronted Gohal with messages received on his mobile phone from Punjab government officers and officials seeking his assistance or intervention in transfer and posting matters, despite Gohal not being the competent authority.
Gohal’s answer is significant.
He told the ED that Rajbir Singh Ghuman, the OSD to the Chief Minister, was an old friend whom he had known for about 22 years, and that he usually visited his office/chamber. Gohal said that because of this acquaintance, several officers, officials and MLAs forwarded requests to him.
Gohal described his role as doing “data entry type work”, preparing lists in Excel and forwarding them to the concerned person. He maintained that he merely assisted them in general work.
When specifically questioned about his role in transfer and posting matters, Gohal denied exercising influence or intervention and said he had only received the requests because of his personal acquaintance with the OSD and forwarded them to concerned officers.
He also denied receiving any commission, monetary consideration, favour, gift, hospitality or other benefit in connection with such transfer and posting requests.
But the questioning goes further.
Gohal was specifically questioned about R.S. Nagra, who, according to his statement, he met in 2022-23 through a common friend.
Gohal told the ED that Nagra was involved in rice-sheller and foodgrain-related business and had asked him to look after work relating to food tenders with the State Government. Gohal stated that he had “political links in Punjab State Govt.” and assured Nagra that he would look after the work.
The ED then confronted him with a series of transfer and posting requests allegedly sent by Nagra, including requests concerning police and civil officers.
Gohal’s answer is particularly relevant to the CMO angle. He said Nagra had forwarded the requests to him because of his links in the Punjab government and that, out of requests received from various persons, including MLAs and halqa in-charges, he had forwarded some requests to the concerned officer in the CMO.
He said he could not then recall the names of the officers to whom he had forwarded the requests.
The statement also records questions about messages from Nagra concerning changes in terms and conditions in Punjab government tenders, the Verka SAP user licence, re-tendering of government tenders and obtaining approval for the Mind Care Hospital, Sirhind licence from the Health Secretary.
Gohal’s explanation was that Nagra sent these requests so that he could help him with the work.
Another potentially significant portion of the statement concerns a presentation titled “State Policies for Foodgrains Labour & Cartage 2024”, which the ED says was found in the electronic material and had been forwarded by Gohal to Nagra.
When asked how he came into possession of what the ED described as a confidential government document, Gohal acknowledged that the presentation had been exchanged between him and Nagra.
He said Nagra was engaged in foodgrain-related business and wanted some favourable changes in the policy for his business.
Gohal was then asked whether he was authorised to receive or access the document. His answer was that, being neither a government employee nor a politician, he was not authorised to access confidential government documents, although he said he had received the document through his links with officers.
Asked why he forwarded it to Nagra, Gohal said he shared it because Nagra was involved in foodgrain-related business and could be affected by the policy, and that he wanted Nagra to suggest changes.
The ED further asked whether Nagra was authorised to access, review or suggest modifications to the government document. Gohal’s answer was categorical: neither he nor Nagra was authorised to access, review or suggest modifications in a confidential government document.
At the same time, throughout this portion of the statement, Gohal denies having any official authority, influence, commission or monetary benefit and maintains that his role was essentially to receive and forward requests and provide general assistance.
That distinction is important. The statement contains acknowledgements concerning the receipt and forwarding of requests and the sharing of the policy document, but it does not amount to an admission of bribery or corruption by Gohal. His denials are also part of the record.
ED seeks action before September 3 hearing
The ED’s latest communication to the Punjab Bureau of Investigation also assumes significance because it was sent after the State police sought additional material.
The agency says it supplied the additional material, including clearer electronic records, the statutory certificate relating to electronic evidence and Gohal’s Section 17 statement.
The ED has requested that the High Court take the entire communication trail on record and issue appropriate directions to ensure a free, fair and impartial investigation.
The agency has separately asked Punjab Police to register an FIR on the basis of the material it has already supplied.
Its latest communication warned that delay in registration could result in destruction or tampering of evidence.
As of the filing placed before the High Court, however, the ED says it had not been informed that an FIR had been registered.
The development has therefore brought the focus squarely back to the Punjab Government and the State police ahead of the September 3 hearing.
The PIL was filed by advocate Nikhil Saraf, who is appearing in person. The High Court has already observed that the allegations are serious and require a careful response, and has sought responses from the Punjab Government, the DGP, the ED and other authorities.
The Punjab Advocate General has also raised a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the PIL. That issue, along with the State’s response to the allegations and the ED material, is now before the Court.
The September 3 hearing is consequently important for more than the question of whether the ED’s communications are formally taken on record.
The Court will have before it the ED’s chronology of its communications with Punjab authorities, the electronic material relied upon by the agency, and the subsequent material supplied to the Bureau of Investigation.
Importantly, the record also includes Gohal’s own Section 17 statement, containing questions and answers concerning the CM’s OSD, transfer and posting requests, the CMO and a confidential government policy document.
The High Court has not, at this stage, recorded any finding that the allegations are proved, nor has it directed that any person be treated as guilty. The material remains subject to investigation and judicial scrutiny.
But with the ED telling the Court that it supplied the material to Punjab Police, sought registration of an FIR and still had no intimation of an FIR in its reply, the September 3 hearing could provide the first clear indication of what action the Punjab Government and State police propose to take.
The allegations have now been formally placed before the High Court. Punjab Today will follow the developments. Watch this space.