The Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) has accused the Centre of targeting Punjab Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann after alleging that he was made to wait for nearly three hours at Delhi’s Indira Gandhi International Airport following his return from Paris and subsequently issued a ₹50,000 challan.

The allegation, made by AAP Punjab media in-charge Baltej Pannu on October 20, has triggered a fresh political confrontation over Mann’s official visit to France, which had already become contentious after the Union government denied political clearance for the trip. AAP has alleged that the airport episode was intended to humiliate the chief minister, although the specific grounds for the challan have not been established in the available reports.

The controversy follows a significant legal setback for the Centre, with the Punjab and Haryana High Court setting aside the refusal to grant political clearance for Mann’s visit and questioning the government’s failure to explain the “political angle” it had cited.

Airport allegation raises questions over challan

According to AAP, Mann was kept waiting at the Delhi airport while officials repeatedly cited the arrival and checking of his luggage. He alleged that officials approached the chief minister again as he was preparing to leave, claiming they were under “tremendous pressure from above”, before issuing the challan.

AAP has not publicly specified the precise grounds on which the ₹50,000 penalty was imposed. The party’s account of the alleged detention, the explanation attributed to officials and its claim of pressure from above have not been independently established.

Shiromani Akali Dal leader Bikram Singh Majithia offered a different account, claiming that Mann and his wife, Gurpreet Kaur, were questioned by Customs officials over suspected excess luggage or money beyond permitted limits. Majithia also alleged that the baggage of staff accompanying the chief minister’s office was to be checked. These claims, too, require confirmation from the authorities concerned.

The competing accounts leave key questions unanswered: which agency issued the challan, what rule was allegedly violated, what material prompted the action and whether the reported delay was connected to a routine Customs examination or any other official process.

AAP has framed the incident as part of a wider pattern of obstacles to Mann’s overseas engagements. The party has linked the airport allegation to previous denials of political clearance for his foreign visits and accused the BJP-led government of obstructing Punjab’s efforts to attract investment.

High Court had questioned Centre’s refusal

The airport controversy has its roots in the dispute over Mann’s proposed visit to Paris from October 17 to 21 to promote Punjab’s products and participate in SIAL Paris 2026, an international food and beverage trade exhibition.

The Punjab government had applied for political clearance through the Ministry of External Affairs’ online system on September 9. The Centre denied clearance on October 12, prompting the state government to approach the Punjab and Haryana High Court.

In its ruling, the High Court questioned the government’s reliance on an unspecified “political angle” to justify the refusal. Justice Tribhuvan Dahiya observed that the ministry had not explained what that political consideration was or how it justified denying the application.

The court also rejected the stated objections concerning the invitation and Mann’s functional role in the proposed visit. It noted that the exhibition organiser, SIAL, had communicated with the French Embassy and welcomed Mann’s participation, describing the visit as an opportunity to establish professional contacts and negotiate contracts.

The court further held that reasons subsequently supplied in an affidavit could not be used to justify the original decision if those reasons had not formed part of the decision itself. The Union government, meanwhile, had cited considerations including bilateral relations, the diplomatic climate, security and the political situation in the host country.

The state government maintained that the refusal was arbitrary and had been communicated at the last minute. The court allowed the delegation’s visit and directed that due protocol be followed.

The latest airport allegations have therefore reopened a broader question about the relationship between political clearance for official foreign travel and the treatment of an elected state chief minister by central authorities. Establishing the facts surrounding the challan will be essential to determining whether the episode involved a routine enforcement action or supports the political allegations being made by AAP.

An official explanation from the authorities responsible for the airport action, including the legal basis for the penalty, would help resolve the central factual dispute. Until then, the alleged detention and its political interpretation remain claims that must be distinguished from the High Court’s documented findings on the separate clearance dispute.