A day after Rajbir Singh Ghuman, Officer on Special Duty in the Punjab Chief Minister’s Office, sought to quash the CBI’s investigation against him in an FIR, Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi of the Punjab and Haryana High Court on Friday directed that the matter be placed before the Chief Justice.Justice Bedi observed that the Division Bench of Chief Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Rohit Kapoor had apparently directed the registration of the FIR on October 5. The Bench was also monitoring the investigation. The order had also been challenged before the Supreme Court.“Therefore, propriety demands that this Court refrain from adjudicating upon the matter because a Division Bench had ordered the registration of the FIR and the said order is under challenge before the Supreme Court and is pending adjudication. In view of the same, let this matter be placed before the Chief Justice for appropriate orders,” Justice Bedi observed.In his petition, Ghuman had also sought directions to set aside all consequential actions until the mandatory sanction under the provisions of the Act was obtained. He contended that the CBI had illegally conducted a search at his residence in Sangrur on October 6 without the sanction required under Section 17A of the Act.“The CBI, after registering the FIR at 11.50 pm on October 5 and without procuring the sanction mandated under the law, conducted the search and carried out the proceedings against the settled position of law,” he added.Referring to the law, he said Parliament had enacted a provision “in terms that admit of only one exception”, stipulating that no police officer shall conduct any inquiry or investigation into an offence under the Act alleged against a public servant without the government’s prior approval, as mandated under Section 17A, “where the offence is relatable to a recommendation made or a decision taken by him in the discharge of his official functions”.He added: “Within twenty-four hours of registering the FIR on October 5, respondent CBI obtained a search warrant and searched his premises in the absence of the petitioner or any of his family members.”He questioned the actions taken and the seizure of material, alleging that these were carried out in violation of the law. “No proposal under Section 17A was moved to the Government of Punjab. No approval exists. Every one of these steps is an investigation which the statute forbade the CBI to conduct,” he added.His counsel submitted that any proceedings initiated against the petitioner had to be in accordance with the law and that the CBI was required to act within the statutory framework and adhere to the safeguards provided under Section 17A of the Act.“Section 17A of the Act provides protection and has to be strictly adhered to. It is not for the CBI to proceed with the matter according to its wishes while ignoring the mandate of the law,” the counsel added.The Centre is represented in the matter by Additional Solicitor-General Satya Pal Jain.