Chandigarh, Feb. 5 -- The Punjab and Haryana high court on Wednesday directed the Punjab State Election Commission (SEC) to have an audio clip, allegedly involving the Patiala senior superintendent of police (SSP), examined by an independent agency outside the control of the state. The clip purportedly features the Patiala SSP, Varun Sharma, directing police personnel during the December 2025 zila parishad elections to prevent opposition candidates from filing nomination papers. Expressing displeasure over the handling of the matter, a division bench comprising Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and justice Sanjeev Berry rapped the SEC, observing that its primary responsibility was to ensure free and fair elections through actions that were "free, fair and impartial". Referring to its December 10 order, the court said it had expected the commission to "rise to the occasion" when concerns were raised about the fairness of the electoral process in Patiala. The bench noted with surprise that despite clear directions to get the audio clip examined by an independent agency, the SEC sent it instead to a laboratory under the state's control. "In all fairness, the commission ought to have forwarded the electronic material to an independent agency to assuage all suspicion or complaints," the court observed. The court was hearing a batch of public interest litigations (PILs) filed by Punjab leader of Opposition and Congress leader Partap Singh Bajwa and Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) leader Daljit Singh Cheema, seeking an independent probe into the controversy ahead of the December 14 zila parishad polls. The audio clip was shared by SAD leader Sukhbir Singh Badal while the nomination process was underway. On December 10, the court had observed that in view of the allegations, the SSP should have been divested of poll duty. Subsequently, Sharma went on leave during the election period, and the SEC ordered a probe by an officer of additional director general of police (ADGP) rank. However, the investigation has made little progress. Disposing of the PILs, the court directed that all electronic material, including the audio clip, be sent to an independent agency not under the control or supervision of the state for examination. During the hearing, advocate general MS Bedi, appearing for the state government, submitted that the probe was delayed as the original source device of the audio clip was not provided by SAD leader Sukhbir Singh Badal despite repeated notices. He said another individual, Arshdeep Singh Kler, had joined the investigation but supplied the clip only through a pen drive, making verification difficult without the original device. Countering the state's submissions, counsel for the petitioners, led by senior advocate APS Deol, questioned why the Patiala SSP had not been summoned for investigation or asked to hand over his mobile phone. "Unless his phone is examined, how can the probe proceed?" Deol argued. The SEC's counsel faced sharp questions from the court while attempting to explain the delay, citing jurisdictional issues as the polls were over. Rejecting the argument, the bench observed that during elections, the entire administrative and police machinery remains under the control and supervision of the SEC, and such objections were not acceptable....