The Government of India has granted sanction to prosecute Vijay Kumar Janjua, a retired IAS officer of the 1989 Punjab cadre, under Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, as amended in 2018.
ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW VIDEO
The sanction was accorded by the Department of Personnel and Training, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, through an order dated February 11, 2026. Janjua, who served as Director-cum-Secretary in the Industries and Commerce Department and later as Chief Secretary of Punjab under the AAP government, faces prosecution in a case registered by the Punjab Vigilance Bureau on November 9, 2009, under Sections 7 and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
The case stems from a complaint by Tulsi Ram Mishra of Ludhiana, who had sought allotment of a vacant plot, E-647-A, adjoining his industrial unit in Phase 7, Focal Point, Ludhiana, under a scheme of the Punjab Small Industries and Export Corporation for allotment of adjoining vacant land.
According to records, Mishra first applied in 2001 for allotment of the adjoining land. His request was rejected on the ground that no vacant land was available. He again represented in 2002, enclosing a site map to show that the land was adjacent to his plot. Despite repeated representations and meetings with senior officials, no decision was taken.
On October 19, 2009, Mishra handed over a fresh representation to Janjua. File notings that followed referred to reconsideration of the matter and discussion on policy. A demand draft of Rs 60,000 in favour of PSIEC was also placed on record.
The complainant alleged that on November 5, 2009, Janjua asked him to meet in Ludhiana and demanded a bribe of Rs 6 lakh for processing the allotment. It was alleged that he agreed to accept Rs 5 lakh, with Rs 2 lakh to be paid in advance.
On November 9, 2009, Mishra approached the Vigilance Bureau and recorded his statement. He produced Rs 2 lakh in Rs 1,000 notes. Phenolphthalein powder was applied to the notes and a trap was laid at Janjua’s office in Udyog Bhawan, Sector 17, Chandigarh.
Story continues below this ad
According to the Vigilance Bureau, after a pre-arranged signal from the shadow witness, officers entered the room. The tainted money was recovered from a drawer in Janjua’s office. A hand-wash test allegedly turned the solution pink, indicating contact with the treated currency notes.
The Punjab government subsequently granted sanction to prosecute Janjua on April 27, 2010.
However, on January 8, 2015, the Special Judge, SAS Nagar, discharged the IAS officer on the ground that the sanction had been accorded by the State Government. The court held that in the case of an IAS officer, the competent authority to grant sanction is the Central Government through the Department of Personnel and Training, Ministry of Personnel.
The complainant challenged Janjua’s discharge before the Punjab and Haryana High Court. In a ruling delivered in September 2023, Justice Anupinder Grewal upheld the discharge but kept the issue open. The court directed the State of Punjab to forward all documents relating to the consideration of sanction for prosecution to the Central Government.
Story continues below this ad
The order stated that the Chief Secretary, Punjab, shall send the papers within one month to the Secretary, Department of Personnel and Training, Government of India. The competent authority in the Central Government was directed to consider the matter and take a final decision in accordance with law within three months of receipt of the papers, extendable by another month.
Justice Grewal further ruled that if sanction were to be granted to prosecute Janjua, the trial court shall proceed in accordance with law and conclude the trial expeditiously.
The Punjab government forwarded the proposal for sanction on September 5, 2025. The Central Vigilance Commission advised grant of sanction on November 28, 2025. After examining the material on record, the competent authority granted approval.
The sanction order, issued in the name of the President of India, enables the Vigilance Bureau to file a chargesheet and proceed with trial against the retired officer.
