Khemka-Verma Legal Battle Moves to Special Court as Two FIR Reports Are Transferred in Panchkula

Sessions court sends connected cancellation reports to PCA special judge; parties asked to appear on September 21

Panchkula, September 8, 2026: A long-running legal dispute involving retired IAS officer Ashok Khemka, IAS officer Sanjeev Verma, former Haryana State Warehousing Corporation (HSWC) officials and others has taken another turn, with the Panchkula sessions court transferring two connected cancellation reports to the special court designated to hear cases under the Prevention of Corruption Act (PCA).

The order means that the two matters, which had been pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM), Panchkula, will now be considered by Special Judge Bikramjit Aroura.

The parties and their lawyers have been directed to appear before the special judge on September 21.

The transfer was ordered by Sessions Judge Sanjay Sandhir, who allowed an application filed by Ravinder Kumar. The court directed that the two untraced reports filed in 2025 be withdrawn from the CJM’s court and placed before the designated special court.

Two Connected FIRs at the Centre of the Dispute

The proceedings relate to two FIRs registered on April 26, 2022, at the Sector-5 police station in Panchkula.

Although the cases arose from separate complaints, they are closely connected and involve allegations exchanged between officials associated with the HSWC.

One case concerned alleged irregularities in appointments made in the corporation during Ashok Khemka’s tenure as its managing director. The other FIR was lodged on Khemka’s complaint against then HSWC managing director Sanjeev Verma, Ravinder Kumar and others.

Both investigations eventually resulted in police filing cancellation reports, bringing the question of whether those reports could be considered before a regular magistrate to the forefront.

FIR No. 170: Appointment-Related Allegations

The first case, FIR No. 170, was registered following a complaint by Vaneet Chawla, who was then secretary of the Haryana State Warehousing Corporation and filed the complaint on behalf of the corporation’s managing director.

The FIR dealt with allegations of irregularities and illegalities in appointments made in the HSWC during Khemka’s tenure as managing director.

Ashok Khemka, Som Nath Rattan, SC Kansal and Naresh Kumar were named as accused in the case.

After investigating the allegations, police subsequently submitted a cancellation report, effectively seeking closure of the case.

The matter, however, did not end there, as questions arose regarding which court had the authority to consider the cancellation report because the FIR included provisions under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

FIR No. 171: Khemka’s Counter-Complaint

The second case, FIR No. 171, was registered at the same police station shortly after FIR No. 170.

This FIR was based on a complaint filed by Ashok Khemka against Sanjeev Verma, who was then the managing director of the HSWC, as well as Ravinder Kumar and others.

Khemka’s complaint alleged a conspiracy and misuse of the official process in connection with the registration of the earlier FIR against him.

The case included allegations relating to conspiracy, providing false information and making false charges, among other provisions. It also included sections of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

Police later filed a cancellation report in this case as well.

Khemka subsequently filed a protest petition challenging the cancellation report, keeping the dispute alive before the court.

Why the Cases Were Moved

A key question before the sessions court was whether the CJM had the authority to consider the cancellation reports when the FIRs included offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

The sessions court relied on earlier decisions of the Supreme Court and concluded that matters involving offences under the PCA fall within the jurisdiction of the designated special court.

The court therefore held that the cancellation reports should not be dealt with by the regular magistrate and instead needed to be placed before the special judge competent to hear corruption cases.

This formed the basis for transferring both matters to the special court.

Court Rejects Objection Over Transfer

The sessions court also considered whether it had the legal power to transfer the cases from the CJM’s court to the designated special court.

The objection was rejected.

The court referred to Section 448 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, which empowers a sessions judge to transfer a criminal case from one court to another within the same sessions division when such a transfer is considered necessary in the interest of justice.

On that basis, the court held that the transfer could legally be made.

What Happens Next?

With the cancellation reports now transferred, the next significant date in the matter is September 21, when the concerned parties and their lawyers have been directed to appear before Special Judge Bikramjit Aroura.

The special court will then deal with the cancellation reports and any objections or protest petitions connected with them in accordance with law.

The transfer itself does not amount to a finding of guilt or wrongdoing against any of the individuals named in the FIRs. The allegations in both cases remain matters for legal consideration.

A Dispute That Began Four Years Ago

The two FIRs date back to April 2022 and arose from an increasingly complicated dispute involving the functioning of the Haryana State Warehousing Corporation and senior officials associated with it.

The cases effectively produced allegations from both sides, with one FIR focusing on alleged appointment irregularities during Khemka’s tenure and the other stemming from Khemka’s complaint concerning the registration of that case.

The subsequent police cancellation reports added another layer to the proceedings, as the courts were required to determine which forum had jurisdiction to consider them.

The latest order settles that procedural question for now by placing both matters before the special court designated for Prevention of Corruption Act cases.

Legal Proceedings Now Shift to Special Court

The transfer is significant because the special court will now have to consider the police reports and the objections raised by the parties.

For Khemka, the proceedings include his protest against the cancellation report in the case arising from his complaint. For the other accused and officials involved, the special court will consider the status of the connected proceedings in accordance with the applicable law.

The September 21 hearing is therefore expected to provide the next important development in the four-year-old dispute.

For the moment, the sessions court’s order is primarily a jurisdictional and procedural decision. It determines where the connected cancellation reports should be considered, while the underlying allegations remain subject to judicial examination.

News source: Information for this article was gathered from a variety of reliable news outlets.