Nominal Index [Citations 231-242]Harjinder Singh @ Jinda & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 231Anuradha v. UOI & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 232Ashok Kumar Bansal v. State of Haryana and others 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 233XXXX v. XXXX 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 234XXXX v. XXX 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 235Mandeep Singh vs Kulwinder Singh and another. 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 236Sunset Kaur v.State...
Nominal Index [Citations 231-242]
Harjinder Singh @ Jinda & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 231
Anuradha v. UOI & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 232
Ashok Kumar Bansal v. State of Haryana and others 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 233
XXXX v. XXXX 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 234
XXXX v. XXX 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 235
Mandeep Singh vs Kulwinder Singh and another. 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 236
Sunset Kaur v.State of Punjab & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 237
Court on its own Motion v.Surjeet Singh 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 238
Maya Devi v. State of Haryana and others 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 239
XXX v. State of Punjab & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 240
XXX v. XXX 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 241
Sumit Nandwani v. State of Haryana 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 242
Reports
Harjinder Singh @ Jinda & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Ors.
2024 LiveLaw (PH) 231
The Punjab and Haryana High has held that merely making "religiously compromised" statements is not an act sufficient for the Magistrate court to take cognizance of offence under Section 295A IPC.
The provision criminalizes deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion.
Anuradha v. UOI & Ors.
2024 LiveLaw (PH) 232
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has held that there will not be a violation of the fundamental right of an employee if the Competent Authority has created or abolished a promotional post.
Justice Jagmohan Bansal said, "A person has right to be considered for promotion against a post. If the Competent Authority has created or abolished a promotional post, the Court cannot hold that there is violation of fundamental right of the candidate to be considered for the said post."
Ashok Kumar Bansal v. State of Haryana and others
2024 LiveLaw (PH) 233
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has refused to allow a plea seeking the release of the land acquired by the State Government for the development of a 'Mandi' which was later used for building a school, observing that the public purpose is served.
A division bench of Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice Lalit Batra said, "The reason is but trite, and, simple, that since even a building subserves the educational pursuits of the school going children, thereupon, concomitantly public good, and, public purpose but becomes subserved. Resultantly, this Court does not find that the raising of a school building on the subject land, is a valid ground for this Court directing the respondents concerned, to consider the release of the subject lands from acquisition."
XXXX v. XXXX
2024 LiveLaw (PH) 234
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that while adjudicating a rape case based on false promise to marry, the Court should take into accounts factors like comparative age of accused and victim, their educational, social and economic background and the nature of their profession.
The list is not exhaustive and Court said entirety of facts and circumstances of each case will have to be considered.
XXXX v. XXX
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 235
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has directed the in-laws of a woman to handover to her the interim-custody of her 8-months-old and 2-years-old daughters.
Justice Kuldeep Tiwari observed that the breastfeeding infant cannot be deprived of her fundamental right to get mother's love and care.
"In the instant case, one of the petitioner's minor daughters, who is aged about 08 months, is completely dependent on her mother's breastfeeding for nourishment and as such, she cannot be deprived of her fundamental right to get the love and affection of her mother, who is well capable to take care of her. Even the physical and biological needs of an 8 months' old child lies in the association of her mother."
In A First, Punjab & Haryana High Court Interprets Provision Of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
Mandeep Singh vs Kulwinder Singh and another.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 236
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has passed its first order interpreting a provision of the newly enforced Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS).
BNSS, along with Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam came into effect from July 1, 2024. Not soon thereafter, on July 2, the High Court was faced with the dilemma whether a criminal revision petition filed before it would be governed by the now repealed CrPC or the BNSS.
Accused Need Not Be Heard Before Directing CBI Investigation: Punjab & Haryana High Court
Sunset Kaur v.State of Punjab & Ors.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 237
Observing that "the accused need not be heard" before passing an order for CBI investigation, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has directed the central agency to probe a multi-crore fraud case in Punjab.
Justice Jasjit Bedi perusing a conspectus of precedents observed, "...this Court can order an investigation by the CBI even after a report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. is submitted and the accused need not be heard before such an order is passed."
Court on its own Motion v.Surjeet Singh
2024 LiveLaw (PH) 238
The Punjab and Haryana High Court while observing that "judges are not super humans and do commit mistakes" has set aside the suo moto criminal contempt case initiated against a man who made pleadings against a Judicial Magistrate.
The man had alleged that the Magistrate is not inclined to pass an order but is only inclined to give adjournments. However, it was found that the adjournments were granted at the request of man's counsel.
Maya Devi v. State of Haryana and others
2024 LiveLaw (PH) 239
Finding it "strange and shocking", the Punjab & Haryana High Court has imposed a cost of Rs. 2 lakh on the Haryana Government for asking its employee to pass a typing test after he retired from the post of Lower Division Clerk (LDC). The State demoted him to Chowkidar post-retirement because he failed to pass the "mandatory test."
XXX v. State of Punjab & Ors.
2024 LiveLaw (PH) 240
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has directed the Punjab Police to provide interim protection to a minor girl who was allegedly evicted from her house by her father after she refused to marry an old person.
Justice Manisha Batra said, "petitioner No.2 is a minor and has approached the Court, it becomes incumbent upon the Court in its capacity as parens patriae to examine what is best in the interest of the minor and it is deemed appropriate to direct Respondent No.2 to take all steps in the present case as per the directions given in Khuspreet Singh's case [Khuspreet Singh and another vs. State of Punjab and others, 2022 (3) RCR (Civil) 988]"
XXX v. XXX
2024 LiveLaw (PH) 241
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has made it clear that depriving a father from meeting his daughter on account of marital discord amounts to cruelty under Section 13(1) (ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act.
While dismissing refusing to interfere in divorce granted on the ground of cruelty, division bench of Justice Sudhir Singh and Justice Harsh Bunger said, "that depriving the father of meeting his daughter, by her mother on account of marital discord between the spouses, would constitute an act of mental cruelty."
Sumit Nandwani v. State of Haryana
2024 LiveLaw (PH) 242
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has directed the Secretary of Telecommunication, Government of India, to deliberate on the issue of cyber-crime that takes place by using pre-paid SIM cards and also by fraudulent marketing companies by using mobiles and landlines.
Other Development
VASU RANJAN SHANDILYA v. UNION OF INDIA. & ORS.
A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been filed in Punjab & Haryana High Court today, seeking directions to allow passing of pubic transports and vehicles from Shambhu border, connecting Punjab-Haryana which is allegedly blocked by protesting farmers and closed by the Haryana Government.
Title: VIJAY KUMAR SINGH V. STATE OF HARYANA
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has flagged the inaction of Haryana Superintendents of Police posted in Sirsa district in monitoring the investigation in criminal cases now pending for several years.
Justice NS Shekhawat while perusing the record said, "...this Court has reasons to believe that various investigations conducted in District Sirsa in different cases have not been monitored properly by the Superintendents of Police who remained posted in District Sirsa since the year 2015."
Centre Notifies Appointment Of Justice Sheel Nagu As Chief Justice Of Punjab & Haryana High Court
The Ministry of Law & Justice today notified the appointment of Justice Sheel Nagu as Chief Justice of the Punjab & Haryana High Court.
"In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (1) of Article 217 of the Constitution of India, the President is pleased to appoint Shri Justice Sheel Nagu, Judge of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, to be the Chief Justice of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana with effect from the date he assumes charge of his office," stated the notification.
Anjali Kukar and others v. Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana through its Chairman and others
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has observed that the action of High Court Bar Association President Vikas Malik, to call for suspension of work till the cancellation of FIR lodged against him, constitutes prima facie contempt.
Malik, who handed over his charge to Bar Association's Vice-President, allegedly assaulted a lawyer in the Court premises on July 01. An FIR was filed against him for criminal intimidation and other offences under Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita. It is alleged that Malik later circulated a WhatsApp message calling for work suspension till the cancellation of FIR.
High Court Seeks Haryana Govt's Response On Gurmeet Ram Rahim's Plea Seeking 21 Days Furlough
Shiromani Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee v. State of Haryana and others.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court today sought response from the Haryana Government on a plea filed by Dera Sacha Sauda chief Gurmeet Ram Rahim, seeking directions to the State to consider his application for 21 days furlough.
Division Bench of Acting Chief Justice GS Sandhawalia and Justice Lapita Banerji has listed the matter for July 31.
RAJINDER SINGH TAGGAR v. STATE OF PUNJAB
The Punjab & Haryana High Court today sought a response from the Punjab Government on the allegations of "highhandedness and colourable exercise of power" by which a Punjab journalist was arrested on charges of extortion for publishing news against a real estate owner. While granting interim bail to journalist Rajinder Singh Taggar, Justice Sandeep Moudgil said, "State of Punjab is called upon to file response to the acquisition of highhandedness and colourable exercise of power which may tantamount not only to abuse of process of law but will violate the right of press i.e. Freedom of Speech and Expression as enshrined in Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India."
NHAI & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Ors.
The Punjab & Haryana High Court today, issued notice on the plea filed by the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) seeking security and administrative assistance for the smooth functioning of toll plazas in Punjab, against the forceful stoppage of toll plazas and illegal operation of the same by the protestors.