NOMINAL INDEX [Citations 387 - 433]Gurcharan Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 387Punjab State and others v. XXXX 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 388DILJIT KAUR v. STATE OF PUNJAB 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 389Raj Kumar Arora v. Central Information Commission and others 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 390ANGURI DEVI v. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 391XXXX v. State of Punjab 2024...
NOMINAL INDEX [Citations 387 - 433]
Gurcharan Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 387
Punjab State and others v. XXXX 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 388
DILJIT KAUR v. STATE OF PUNJAB 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 389
Raj Kumar Arora v. Central Information Commission and others 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 390
ANGURI DEVI v. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 391
XXXX v. State of Punjab 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 392
Iqbal Singh v. SS Gill (deceased) through LRs & Anr 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 393
XXXXX v. State of Haryana 2024 LiveLaw ( PH) 393
Iqbal Singh v. SS Gill (deceased) through LRs & Anr 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 395
Mehmood Pracha v. Election Commission of India and others 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 396
Babli v. Khillar Singh and another 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 397
XXXX v. State of Punjab 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 398
Anoop Singh and Another v. State of Punjab [along with connected matter] 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 390
KULWINDER SINGH AND ANR v. STATE OF PUNJAB 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 391
NXXXX v. State of Haryana and others 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 392
M/s. Imaging Solutions (P) Ltd. v. State of Haryana and others 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 393
Sher Singh v. State of Punjab 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 394
VIJAY KUMAR AND OTHERS v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 395
Employees State Insurance Corporation v. Punjab State Electricity Board 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 396
XXXX v. State of Punjab and another 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 397
MAHINDRO DEVI AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS] 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 398
Arshdeep Singh @ Arsh and another v. State of Punjab 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 399
Malkit Singh & anr. v. State of Punjab & ors. 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 400
B.S. Danewalia (since deceased) through LR v. State of Punjab and Ors 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 402
Hero Cycles Ltd. v. State of Punjab and others 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 403
SATINDER PAL SINGH v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 404
Dushyant v/s State of Haryana 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 405
Jaswant Singh alias Babla v. State of Punjab 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 406
Sarban Singh v. State of Punjab 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 407
XXXX v. State of Haryana 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 408
AMARJEET SINGH SIDHU v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 409
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION V/S GURMEET RAM RAHIM AND ANOTHER 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 410
Gajjan Singh and Anr v. State of Haryana and Ors 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 411
Jageshwar and another v. UOI & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 412
XXXXX V. XXXX 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 413
Mamman Khan v. State of Haryana & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 414
XXXXX v. State of Punjab and others 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 415
M/s Dillano Luxurious Jewels Limited v. Deputy Director Income Tax, Investigation, Bathinda and anr. 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 416
Court on its own motion v. Mulakh Raj Mehta, Advocate and another 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 417
ABC (MINOR) v. STATE OF UNION TERRITORY CHANDIGARH 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 418
Anju Bala @ Anju Devi v. State of Haryana and Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 419
Lakhbir Singh @ Lakha v. State of Punjab 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 420
District Bar Association, Malerkotla v. State of Punjab and others 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 421
Gurmej v State of Punjab 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 422
Yogendra v. State of Haryana 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 423
Inderpreet Singh Vs. Tejveer Singh, IAS and others 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 424
Naveen Kumar Batra v. State of Haryana and others 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 425
Jai Naraiyan and Another v. State of Punjab and Others [along with other petitions] 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 426
AJAY KUMAR v. STATE OF PUNJAB 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 427
XXXX v. AXXX 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 428
State of Haryana and another v. Nishabar Singh and others 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 429
Virender v. State of Haryana and another appeal 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 430
Poonam Rani v. State of Punjab and others 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 431
NAVISH KUMAR @ NAVI v. STATE OF PUNJAB 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 432
Bharat Bhushan Sharma @ Ashu v. State of Punjab 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 433
REPORTS
Title: Gurcharan Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 387
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has quashed the FIR and related proceedings under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SC/ST Act), observing that it was no where mentioned in the FIR lodged by the complainant that accused persons were aware of his caste.
Justice NS Shekhawat noted, "While narrating this incident, it has no where been mentioned in the complaint by the respondent No. 2/complainant that the petitioners were aware that the respondent No. 2 belonged to a scheduled caste. Merely because of the fact that the respondent No. 2 had been employed by Balbir Singh in a nearby fields is no ground to draw an inference in this regard."
Case Title: Punjab State and others v. XXXX
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 388
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has set aside an order of the first appellate court granting Rs 30,000 compensation (along with interest) to a woman who became pregnant after a sterilisation operation.
In doing so the high court noted that prior to surgery the woman was apprised of the fact that sometimes operation may fail for which no medical authority will be held responsible and that she had signed a form stating the same. The high court thus restored the trial court order which had dismissed the woman's plea after noting that she had failed to prove medical negligence on behalf of the doctor.
Title: DILJIT KAUR v. STATE OF PUNJAB
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 389
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has granted exemption from personal appearance to a British citizen involved in a criminal case, observing that applications for exemption should be decided liberally.
Justice Sandeep Moudgil said, "The Courts are empowered to impose any other condition which they may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice. For example, if the trial is being delayed on account of the absence of the accused when the witnesses are required to identify him, the accused can be directed to be present for this purpose. If the Courts become liberal in granting exemption from personal appearance, it would reduce the avoidable footfall in the Courts and would facilitate the effective dispose of the trial. The Courts should only order appearance of the accused when it becomes indispensable."
Title: Raj Kumar Arora v. Central Information Commission and others
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 390
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has rejected an Income Tax Officer's plea seeking information under the Right to information Act (RTI Act) relating to Trap Proceeding conducted against him by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).
The Income Tax Officer was convicted in a corruption case and his appeal against the conviction is pending before the High Court. The Court noted that the information sought was required to strengthen his defence in appeal.
Title: ANGURI DEVI v. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 391
The Punjab & Haryana High Court granted benefit of full pension to widow of a soldier who died in 1965 War on the western front due to a mine-blast.
The Court set aside the order of the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) to the extent whereby, the arrears were restricted to three years prior to the date of filing of the application on account of delay of 54 years.
Title: XXXX v. State of Punjab
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 392
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has made it clear that merely accompanying the minor after her departure or passive association is not sufficient to constitute the offence of kidnapping a minor from their lawful guardian.
The Court upheld the acquittal of the accused in the case of kidnapping a minor girl, observing that it was a case of "consensual elopement, rather than kidnapping as alleged by the prosecution."
Iqbal Singh v. SS Gill (deceased) through LRs & Anr
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 393
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has flagged a "strange" case where the Rent Control Appellate Authority passed conflicting judgements with respect to same property between same parties on the same day. It was brought to the Court's notice that the Appellate Authority on the same day has given two conflicting orders - in one, on the same very grounds, ejectment has been ordered and in the other, on the same very grounds, the appeal preferred by the landlord dismissing his ejectment application has been rejected.
Title: XXXXX v. State of Haryana
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 394
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has upheld the conviction of a school teacher for sexually assaulting a class 8th student under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act), while noting that the "occurrence took place in school premises."
Justice Amarjot Bhatti said, "as per facts of the case, it is fully covered under the provisions of Section 9 (f) of POCSO Act as victim was sexually assaulted by appellant/convict Sanjay Kumar while he was posted as Hindi Teacher and the victim was studying in the same school in 8th standard. Occurrence took place in the school premises. Therefore, considering the facts of the case, it is a case of aggravated sexual assault and he was rightly held guilty under Section 10 of the POCSO Act."
Iqbal Singh v. SS Gill (deceased) through LRs & Anr
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 395
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has flagged a "strange" case where the Rent Control Appellate Authority passed conflicting judgements with respect to same property between same parties on the same day. It was brought to the Court's notice that the Appellate Authority on the same day has given two conflicting orders - in one, on the same very grounds, ejectment has been ordered and in the other, on the same very grounds, the appeal preferred by the landlord dismissing his ejectment application has been rejected.
Case Title: Mehmood Pracha v. Election Commission of India and others
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 396
The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Monday (December 9) directed the Election Commission of India (ECI) to provide required documents of Haryana Assembly Elections to Advocate Mehmood Pracha.
Justice Vinod S. Bhardwaj in his order said, "Taking into the consideration the provisions of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, the respondents are directed to supply the copy of the requisite documents, other than the documents qua which a restriction has been imposed under the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, within a period of 06 weeks of submission of such an application and deposit of the requisite charges by the petitioner."
Title: Babli v. Khillar Singh and another
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 397
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has made it clear that once parties have entered into mutual settlement, backing out from the same cannot be allowed under the law.
In a cheque bounce case the complainant backed out from the compromise, however the court rejected the claim and quashed the complaint in view of earlier stand that compromise had taken place.
Title: XXXX v. State of Punjab.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 398
The Punjab & Haryana High has granted Rs 2 lakh compensation for "unjust deprivation of liberty" of a man who was continued to be detained under NDPS Act, despite the forensic report revealing that the alleged contraband was nothing but paracetamol. Justice Kirti Singh noted that the petitioner was subjected to prolonged incarceration for a period of about "13 days despite the fact that the recovery made from him was tablets containing salt Acetaminophen (Paracetamol) and the concerned police authorities despite having received the FSL report on 31.08.2024 failed to act promptly and get the petitioner immediately released."
Title: Anoop Singh and Another v. State of Punjab [along with connected matter]
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 390
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has upheld the conviction in a double murder case of four convicts, observing that the fine of Rs.50,000 imposed on one convict was "extremely minimal" and there should not be a disparity of fine amount among co-convicts.
Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Kuldeep Tiwari said, "the imposition of the fine amount of Rs.50,000/- upon the convict...Gurdev Singh under Section 302/149 IPC is extremely minimal, and, is required to be enhanced, as the fine amount is required to be on its realization disbursed to the family members of the deceased, besides therebys there would be no disparity with the fine amounts, as became imposed upon other co-convicts."
Case Title: KULWINDER SINGH AND ANR v. STATE OF PUNJAB
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 391
While deciding a plea for extension of time to join probe, the Punjab and Haryana High Court made a video call on WhatsApp to the concerned Station House Officer, to ascertain whether the accused persons who were granted anticipatory bail, had joined investigation in a cheating case.
The development came during the proceeding when the State counsel submitted that the accused had not joined the proceedings but the counsel representing the accused persons submitted that the police authorities were not allowing the petitioners to join the investigation despite the fact they were present in the police station.
Case Title: NXXXX v. State of Haryana and others
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 392
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has made it clear that a High Court can transfer a probe to CBI even when the FIR is not lodged in the case and for passing such a direction, the consent of the State will not be required.
Justice Sumeet Goel said, "The High Court is well empowered to direct a CBI investigation, of a cognizable offence, alleged to have been committed within the territory of a State/Union Territory. To clarify, such directions can be issued by the High Court without an FIR earlier having been registered by the State/Union Territory."
Case Title: M/s. Imaging Solutions (P) Ltd. v. State of Haryana and others
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 393
The Punjab and Haryana High Court stated that appeal cannot be dismissed as not maintainable on account of non-payment of requisite fee.
The Division Bench consisting of Justices Sanjeev Prakash Sharma and Sanjay Vashisth was considering a case where the Appellate Authority dismissed the appeal as not maintainable on the ground that the assessee/petitioner had failed to pay Rs. 10,000/- as fee for hearing the appeal while the assessee was required to deposit a total sum of Rs. 20,000/- as fee.
Title: Sher Singh v. State of Punjab
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 394
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has refused to grant bail to a man accused of illicit trafficking of 50 grams of heroin, observing that "the quantity involved is categorized as "Intermediate Quantity" does not, by itself, bestow an automatic right to bail.
Justice Sandeep Moudgil said, "merely because the quantity involved is categorized as "Intermediate Quantity" does not, by itself, bestow an automatic right to bail. Granting bail to those accused of trafficking or peddling highly dangerous substances such as Heroin/Chitta would essentially offer carte blanche for illegal activities. Such a decision would embolden these individuals to persist in their illicit trade, operating under the misguided belief that even if apprehended, they could be swiftly released on bail."
Title: VIJAY KUMAR AND OTHERS v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 395
The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Thursday (December 12) directed the Punjab State Election Commission to video-graph the filing of nomination papers in the upcoming Punjab Municipal Corporation Election scheduled on December 21.
A division bench of Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice Kirti Singh in its order directed the State Election Commission, "that as and when municipal elections are conducted to the Municipal Corporation concerned, thereupon the respondents concerned, shall ensure that complete compliance is made to the guidelines issued by the State Election Commission, Punjab, relating to Videography of the nomination process till its withdrawal."
Cannot Apply 1989 Amendment Retrospectively And Issue Demand Notices Under ESI Act: P&H HC
Employees State Insurance Corporation v. Punjab State Electricity Board
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 396
A single judge bench of Justice Pankaj Jain dismissed appeals filed by the Employees State Insurance Corporation (ESIC). It upheld the order by the ESI court exempting the Punjab State Electricity Board (PSEB) from paying ESI contributions for its Phagwara sub-station. It held that Section 1(6) was introduced in 1989 and could not be applied retrospectively to cover earlier periods. Consequently, the court noted that the sub-station did not fall under the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (ESI Act), since it had less than 20 employees during the relevant period prior to the amendment.
Title: XXXX v. State of Punjab and another
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 397
The Punjab & Haryana High Court quashed the cruelty case filed by woman having Australian citizenship against her former Australian husband and in-laws observing that, "disturbing trend where criminal prosecution is initiated in matrimonial disputes in India by foreign nationals, who have voluntarily availed citizenship of another country and are in continuous residence there."
Justice Harpreet Singh Brar said, “merely for the purpose of harassment, criminal complaints are filed in India. When the matrimonial disputes stand settled by the concerned forum abroad, proxy litigation in India cannot be allowed to be commenced in India to satisfy personal spite.”
Title: MAHINDRO DEVI AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS]
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 398
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has made it clear that under the Haryana Panchayati Raj Act at the time of convening of meeting for no-confidence motion, the presence of the majority of the members is not required.
Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice Sudeepti Sharma said, "There is no statutorily prescribed strength in rule supra, thus appertaining to the specific numbers of the requisitionees for enabling the well convening of the meeting for considering the no-confidence motion. Contrarily when the counsel for the petitioners has mis depended upon the proviso to Section 62 of the Act of 1994, to mis-argue that the strength mentioned therein, is to be the one to be mustered by the requisitionees of the meeting."
Title: Arshdeep Singh @ Arsh and another v. State of Punjab
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 399
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has observed that the alleged victim's instigation to commit suicide would not have come "if the laws were suitably drafted and enacted to tackle and deal" with the situation, wherein the accused persons failed to return the deceased person's money.
It also noted that the new criminal law which has replaced the Indian Penal Code, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita failed to incorporate the change required to deal with offences like cheating or misappropriation.
Malkit Singh & anr. v. State of Punjab & ors.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 400
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has transferred investigation into death of a youth, who passed in 2021 after alleged custodial torture at Budhlada police station in Punjab's Mansa district, to IPS officer Himadri Kaushik, currently posted as DCP in Haryana's Panchkula.
Justice Vinod S. Bhardwaj said, "This Court has noticed the stand of the respondents (State) but it has nowhere explained the presence of 23 injuries on the deceased and all of them below the abdominal area. The injuries are thus on a pattern and not just random injuries in a scuffle or fight. Besides, the DSP has filed his reply on the basis of a report submitted by the SHO against whom allegations have been levelled. The SIT constituted later also does not give any reasonable explanation and seem to be an eye-wash."
Case Title: Kashmir Singh v. Sukhbir Singh Badal
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 401
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has dismissed a petition challenging the Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) leader and MP Sukhbir Singh Badal's election in 2019 general elections, noting that an election petition cannot be entertained based on vague averments.
The election petition had alleged that Badal failed to disclose details of dependent daughters in Form 26, omitted expenditure incurred during rallies addressed by former Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal and had engaged in corrupt practices such as the distribution of liquor to influence voters.
Pension Benefits To Upgraded Posts Can Be Granted Even Post-Retirement: Punjab & Haryana High Court
Title: B.S. Danewalia (since deceased) through LR v. State of Punjab and Ors
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 402
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has directed to revise the pension of a retired Inspector General of Police, based on the pay scale of the upgraded Director-General of Police post.
The Court observed that if the person opted for pre-mature retirement from a post and after that the said post is upgraded, he will still be entitled to the pension benefits granted to the new upgraded post.
Title: Hero Cycles Ltd. v. State of Punjab and others
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 403
A watchful and diligent Judge can prove to be a protector of right to speedy right within any guidelines the Punjab & Haryana High Court said while directing a trial court to conclude the trial within 2 years in a fraud case.
Justice N.S. Shekhawat said, "The propositions emerging from Article 21 of the Constitution of India and expounding the right to speedy trial laid down the guidelines in Abdul Rehman Antulay case, adequately took care of right to speedy trial and this Court is always guided by the said propositions, as, which are also binding precedents. The criminal courts should exercise their available powers such as those under Section 309, 311 and 258 of Cr.P.C. to effectuate the right to speedy trial. A watchful and diligent Judge can prove to be a protector of such rights within any guidelines."
Title: SATINDER PAL SINGH v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 404
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has said that it is "arbitrary and illegal" to ask a candidate whose fingers were amputed to pass typing test for the post of clerk.
The candidate had competed in the reserved category of Ex- Servicemen (general). As per the petitioner, while in service, he was part of the Kargil battle and unfortunately, lost his two fingers of each hand.
Case title: Dushyant v/s State of Haryana
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 405
Observing that property frauds are "alarmingly prevalent" in Delhi-NCR, the Punjab & Haryana High Court has dismissed the anticipatory bail plea of a man accused of duping crores by falsely claiming ownership of land at a prime location in Noida.
It was alleged that the accused took Rs.2 crores by falsely claiming ownership of a prime parcel of land in Noida, allegedly belonging to another person, and enticed the complainant with promises of purchasing the property at a significantly undervalued price.
Title: Jaswant Singh alias Babla v. State of Punjab
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 406
Overturning a 20-year-old order convicting a man under NDPS Act for illicit trading of poppy husk and sentenced to 12 years of imprisonment, the Punjab and Haryana High Court observed that the sample recovered was not the one which was sent to Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL). The appellant was convicted under Section 15 of NDPS Act for possessing over 29 kgs and 750 grams of poppy husk. The court while overuling the trial court order observed that there was scope to infer that the case property was tampered with.
Title: Sarban Singh v. State of Punjab
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 407
Flagging the rising trend of filing frivolous cases, the Punjab & Haryana High Court has said that the investigating officers are not merely postmen, who are there only to forward the complaints they receive to the Courts and to add "unnecessary pressure to the judicial system" and "ruin lives of citizens."
Justice Alok Jain said, "A very shocking scenario is emerging whereby false and frivolous cases are being lodged, but since there is no accountability or check on the actions of Investigating Officers which not only burdens the Courts but also ruins the lives of ordinary citizens as lodging an FIR is a starting point whereby the expertise of the Investigating Officer should be such that the truth should be revealed."
Case Title: XXXX v. State of Haryana
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 408
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has reiterated if there is a conflict between the provisions of POCSO Act and the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, then provisions of the POCSO Act will be applicable as it was enacted subsequently.
It also reaffirmed that a regular bail plea moved in a case registered under the provisions of the two special legislations is maintainable before the high court.
Title: AMARJEET SINGH SIDHU v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 409
Observing "due to the deliberate laxity on the part of the investigating authorities no action was taken by the police authorities despite lapse of nearly 2 year", the Punjab & Haryana High Court imposed a cost of Rs 1 lakh costs on Jalandhar Police Commissioner.
An FIR was lodged alleging that the petitioner was duped of over Rs. 4 lakh rupees for providing work permit in Canada.
Case Title: CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION V/S GURMEET RAM RAHIM AND ANOTHER
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 410
The Punjab & Haryana High Court on Friday (December 20) has asked the CBI court to decide afresh in 4 weeks the relevance of certain documents including statements of witnesses sought by Dera Sacha Sauda Chief Gurmeet Ram Rahim for his defence in a case concerning the castration of his follower.
It was alleged that a large number of followers were castrated at the behest of the Dera chief on false claim of “realisation by God”.
Title: Gajjan Singh and Anr v. State of Haryana and Ors
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 411
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has said that even if a person are lawful owners of land classified as protected forest under Indian Forest Act, they cannot fell trees on such land.
Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice Sudeepti Sharma said, "even if assumingly the plaintiffs are owners of the suit land, yet therebys they cannot be permitted to fell the trees, as thereupons there would be an imminent cascading ill effect on the environment, whereas, for preservation thereofs Section 35 supra has been incorporated in the Indian Forest Act, 1927."
Title: Jageshwar and another v. UOI & Ors.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 412
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has reiterated that the authorities cannot question a major person of sound mind that how will he use the compensation awarded.
Justice Vikas Bahl said, “The money to which he is found entitled is to be handed over to him without placing any riders thereon and that once the compensation has been awarded, the same would go to the claimant, as no one can question a major person of sound mind as to how he would put the said money to use.“
Title: XXXXX V. XXXX
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 413
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has said that the salary of an Army personnel cannot be attached to realise the arrears of maintenance under Section 125 CrPC, as only the Central government is authorised to make deductions.
The Court noted that under Army Act a broad spectrum of rights and protections has been granted to the Army personnel with an intention to ensure that they can duly perform their duties and responsibilities towards protection of the nation effectively, free from external financial encumbrances.
Mamman Khan v. State of Haryana & Ors.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 414
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has dismissed the plea filed by Congress MLA Mamman Khan against segregation of his trial by the trial court in Nuh from other accused in connection with the July 2023 Nuh violence case.
Justice Mahabir Singh Sindhu said, "in view of the charges framed by learned trial Court, prima facie, it is discernible that petitioner being a lawmaker (MLA), has broken the law and in order to maintain the faith of common man as well as to uphold the Rule of Law, there would be no harm, if the elected representative is brought to justice, expeditiously."
Title: XXXXX v. State of Punjab and others
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 415
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has made it clear that a litigant has no indefeasible right to appear in person.
Justice Sumeet Goel said, "There is no right nay indefeasible right vested in a litigant to appear on his/her own before a Court/authority etc. & it is within the discretion of such Court/authority etc. to grant or not to grant permission to such litigant to appear on his/her own."
Title: M/s Dillano Luxurious Jewels Limited v. Deputy Director Income Tax, Investigation, Bathinda and anr.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 416
Calling the action of Income Tax Authorities as "arbitrary, illegal", the Punjab & Haryana High Court has directed it to release the jewellery of a company seized from bank locker during search operation.
The Court noted that as per Section 132 Income Tax Act, there is a bar to seize the stock in trade, which is found as a result of search, and the only authority available with the officer is to make a note and inventory of such stock in trade of the business.
Title: Court on its own motion v. Mulakh Raj Mehta, Advocate and another
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 417
The Punjab & Haryana High Court closed the contempt case initiated against Hisar District Court advocates and editor of a local daily for getting published an article against district judges that they are allegedly practising. The alleged contemnor relied on Section 13 of the Contempt of Court, in defence.
According to Section 13, the court may permit, in any proceeding for contempt of court, justification by truth as a valid defence if it is satisfied that it is in public interest and the request for invoking the said defence is bona fide.
Title: ABC (MINOR) v. STATE OF UNION TERRITORY CHANDIGARH
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 418
The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently quoted poet Nida Fazli's poem while setting aside the order of the Juvenile Justice Board (JJB), to try a juvenile as an adult in a POCSO case.
"Jin Charaaghon Ko Hawaon Ka Koi Khauf Nahi, Un Charaaghon Ko Hawaon Se Bachaya Jaye” (Those lamps that are not fearful of strong winds, they must be protected from the winds, let's do that), the court said.
Anju Bala @ Anju Devi v. State of Haryana and Ors.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 419
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has upheld the removal of Haryana's Sohna Municipal Council President on the grounds of submitting a “fake” class VIII marksheet. Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Sudeepti Sharma said, “What magnifies the ill conduct of the present petitioner as but arises from the withholding of the original, wherefrom an adverse inference has been drawn against her, thus, also become borrowed from the trite fact, that the Certificate, has been issued by one Mukesh Upadhayay, who, however unclinchingly and unrefutably, has been stated to be at the time of issuance of same, rather aged 14 to 15 years. Since therebys he was, as aptly concluded by the Enquiry Officer, rather completely disabled to claim that he was an empowered employee of the Educational Institution. As but a naturally corollary thereto, the Certificate concerned issued vis-a-vis the present petitioner, thus clearly is a fake and unauthentic Certificate.”
Lakhbir Singh @ Lakha v. State of Punjab
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 420
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has said that doing stunt with vehicle on a public road "depict a callous and unconcerned attiude towards the pedestrians" would not fall under rash and negligent driving, but prima facie amounts to culpable homicide.
A pillion rider sitting on a bike allegedly died in an accident with a tractor, modified by fitting an extra turbo pump to increase the acceleration.
District Bar Association, Malerkotla v. State of Punjab and others
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 421
The Punjab & Haryana High Court takes a "a serious view of the sad situation where it seems that the State of Punjab is treating the third pillar of democracy (Judiciary) very shabbily."
The development came while hearing the two Public Interest Litigations filed by the District Bar Association, Malerkotla pertaining to the shortage of space in District Courts and accommodation for judicial officers in Punjab and Haryana.
Title- Gurmej v State of Punjab
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 422
The Punjab & Haryana High Court said that a person would not be an “ordinarily resident” in terms of Punjab Election Commission Act only on the ground of owning or possessing a house.
The court said, “though the statutory coinage “ordinarily resident” has been statutorily conveyed the connotation, that any voter would not be “ordinarily resident” in a constituency or in any revenue estate concerned, thus merely on the ground that the he owns or is in possession of a dwelling house in that constituency/revenue estate.”
Title: Yogendra v. State of Haryana
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 423
While granting bail to a man booked for offences under the NDPS Act, the Punjab & Haryana High Court observed that district court's reluctance in granting bail burdens the High Court, delays hearing of matters like appeals, revision and it is for the "hierarchical court" like the high court to "introspect".
The Court said that, "Bails deal with pre-trial curtailment of liberty on unilateral allegations demanding paramount priority in judicial adjudication. However, trial courts, even in matters where bail should ordinarily be the norm often exhibit hesitation or reluctance in granting bail, and in all probabilities, they cannot be entirely blamed for this harsh approach. It would always be better to err on the side of liberty".
Inderpreet Singh Vs. Tejveer Singh, IAS and others
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 424
The Punjab Government today deferred the Municipal Corporation elections in certain wards of Patiala and Dharamkot district after a plea before the Punjab and Haryana High Court was filed alleging snatching of nomination papers in front of police.
During the hearing, petitioners shown the videos where it was clearly seen that some police men were standing when nomination papers of women was snatched and destroyed by culprits in front of Police men.
Title: Naveen Kumar Batra v. State of Haryana and others
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 425
The Punjab & Haryana High Court imposed a cost of Rs.5 lakh on litigant who repeatedly abused the process of court by filing successive pleas and suppressed “crucial fact.”
The plea was filed challenging the resumption order of a land which was allotted to the petitioner subject to certain conditions. The Court found that the petitioner did not full fill the conditions and filed successive petitions, suppressing facts and pleading ignorance.
Title: Jai Naraiyan and Another v. State of Punjab and Others [along with other petitions]
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 426
The Punjab & Haryana High Court upheld the reservation made in a ward in Punjab's Nagar Panchayat Khanauri, Sangrur for the Punjab Municipal Corporation election, observing that the roster for reserving seats is created to ensure representation of the backward class category of candidates in local self-bodies.
Title: AJAY KUMAR v. STATE OF PUNJAB
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 427
The Punjab & Haryana High Court granted anticipatory bail in fraud and Prevention of Corruption Act case to a Junior Engineer posted in Municipal Council Khanna, accused for committing embezzlement of Rs. 3.17 lakhs.
Justice Sandeep Moudgil said, "multiple inquires on same set of allegations would amount to violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India added with the fact that the petitioner has bona fide intentions and is willing to join the investigation and cooperate for furtherance of the same so that the final report can be submitted by the Investigating Agency within the stipulated period."
Untorn Clothes Of Alleged Victim Denotes Consent: Punjab & Haryana HC Acquits Man In Rape Case
Title: XXXX v. AXXX
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 428
The Punjab & Haryana High Court acquitted a man in rape case observing discrepancy in the prosecutrix's testimony and that the alleged sexual intercourse was consensual as the clothes of the prosecutrix were not torn at the crime site.
The Court said, "The existence of untorn clothes of the prosecutrix, at the crime site, also is magnificatory that, as such, the prosecutrix was a consensual partner to hers allegedly becoming subjected to sexual intercourse(s) at the instance of the accused Arjun Singh, especially if she was a non-consensual partner to the sexual assault, therebys her clothes would have been torn, rather than her clothes being found in an untorn condition at the crime site."
Title: State of Haryana and another v. Nishabar Singh and others
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 429
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has struck down Section 101A inserted by Haryana assembly in the Right to Fair Compensation Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013.
This provision gave state government the power to denotify a land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act 1894 if the public purpose for which the land was acquired becomes unviable or unnecessary.
Case Title: Virender v. State of Haryana and another appeal
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 430
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has acquitted two men in a sexual assault case under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, observing that the presumption under Section 29 for abetting or attempting to commit certain offences under the Act cannot be drawn on account of lack of evidence.
As per Section 29 of the POCSO Act, where a person is prosecuted for committing or abetting or attempting to commit any offence under sections 3(Penetrative sexual assault), 5(Aggravated penetrative sexual assault), 7(Sexual assault) and section 9(Aggravated sexual assault) of this Act, the Special Court shall presume, that such person has committed or abetted or attempted to commit the offence, as the case may be unless the contrary is proved.
Mere Eligibility Does Not Confer Any Right Of Promotion: Punjab & Haryana High Court Reiterates
Case Title: Poonam Rani v. State of Punjab and others
Citation : 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 431
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has reiterated that promotion is not a fundamental right, and it cannot be claimed from the date that the vacancy to a post arises nor does mere eligibility confer any right for promotion.
In the present case, the petitioner sought promotion from the date when she became eligible for the post.
Title: NAVISH KUMAR @ NAVI v. STATE OF PUNJAB
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 432
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has said that the High Court is not empowered to condone delay in filing appeal under National Investigation Agency Act (NIA) beyond 90 days and provision of Section 21(5) is "mandatory" in nature.
As per Section 21 of the Act, an appeal has to be made within 30 days of the date of the order or judgment. The Section allows the High Courts to entertain an appeal even after expiry of 30 days but not beyond 90 days if it is satisfied that there was a sufficient cause for delay.
Title: Bharat Bhushan Sharma @ Ashu v. State of Punjab
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 433
The Punjab & Haryana High Court quashed two FIRs against former Congress food, civil supplies and consumer affairs minister Bharat Bhusan Ashu, and others in a corruption case pertaining to the alleged foodgrain tender and transportation scam.
Two FIRs were lodged under the Prevention of Corruption Act and provisions of the IPC by Ludhiana and Jalandhar Vigilance Bureau in an alleged Rs. 2,000 crore scam involving the transportation of foodgrains during the Congress Government in 2017-2022.