The Haryana Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) had sought Government approval to initiate an open inquiry against Amneet P Kumar, IAS, and her late husband, Y Puran Kumar, IPS, over allegations of possessing assets disproportionate to their known sources of income before the death of the officer, allegedly by suicide.
Interestingly, the proposal, submitted in August 2024, is still awaiting a Government decision. The matter has recently drawn attention following allegations that Amneet P Kumar attempted to negotiate the closure of the case in exchange for permission to conduct the post-mortem of her husband’s body.
Y Puran Kumar, an officer of Inspector General rank, was found dead at the couple’s residence in Sector 11, Chandigarh, on October 7 with a gunshot wound. Police have described the death as a suspected case of suicide. Rohtak Assistant Sub-Inspector (ASI) Sandeep Lathar, who allegedly shot himself dead on October 14, had left behind a note levelling allegations of corruption against the IPS officer and seeking a probe into the assets of the family.
An anonymous complaint alleging amassing of properties disproportionate to known sources of income through corrupt practices by Y Puran Kumar and Amneet P Kumar was received through post in ACB on June 4, 2024. A copy of this complaint was also received from the office of the Director General of Police, Haryana on June 7, 2024. Yet another copy of the complaint was sent by ACS, Home, Haryana to the DGP, Haryana for report/comments on July 9, 2024, and the same was endorsed to this office on July 19, 2024, furnishing report/comments directly to ACS, Home, Haryana.
Moreover, the preliminary findings from the ACB reportedly indicate that the couple’s assets were more than 100 per cent disproportionate to their known sources of income. The report also mentions the possible undervaluation of property purchases, suspected money laundering, and nondisclosure of property details in the mandatory annual property returns. Investigators have identified multiple residential and commercial properties linked to the couple in Gurugram, Panchkula, Chandigarh, Mohali, and Hyderabad, some allegedly acquired at prices significantly below prevailing market rates. One of the key transactions cited in the report involves the purchase of House No. 116, Sector 11-A, Chandigarh.
The officers hold a 50 per cent share in this property and declared a purchase price of Rs 2.80 crore, while the property’s market value was estimated at around Rs 6 crore. In contrast, the owner of the second floor-holding only 20 per cent share-reportedly paid Rs 5.80 crore, raising questions about the declared valuation of the IAS-IPS couple’s transaction.
The verification exercise, covering the period 2012 to 2023, estimated the couple’s disproportionate assets at Rs 10.35 crore, amounting to 106 per cent over their known sources of income. The report also highlights alleged lapses in the officers’ Immovable Property Returns (IPRs), including missing details such as purchase values, locations, and property numbers- violations of the All India Services (Conduct) Rules. The inquiry further refers to several cash deposits in an account belonging to Puran Kumar, described as “prima facie suspicious” and recommended for detailed examination.
Another point of concern cited in the report is that Puran Kumar allegedly had access to confidential ACB file notings while the probe was in progress. He reportedly filed a complaint on August 9, 2024, questioning the conduct of the inquiry officer—a move the ACB viewed as indicative of possible unauthorised access to internal records. The Additional Director General (ADG), ACB, recommended that a formal explanation be sought in this regard.
The ACB’s proposal recommends the registration of an open inquiry to enable detailed verification of assets and investments and to give the officers an opportunity to present their side. If approved, the open inquiry would lead to a formal investigation under the Prevention of Corruption Act to determine whether the alleged undervaluations, unexplained income, and property transactions amount to criminal misconduct.
