Punjab & Haryana High Court Quarterly Digest: January To March 2022 [Citations 1-51]

1. Lovepreet Singh v. Haryana Public Service Commission and another 2022 LiveLaw (P&H) 1
2. Amarjeet Singh @ Amar Singh v. National Investigation Agency 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 2
3. Mahidul Sheikh Vs. State of Haryana 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 3
4. Sukhwinder Kaur @ Rajvir Kaur v. State of Punjab 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 4
5. Sahil v. State of Haryana 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 5
6. Mun Mun Dutta v. State of Haryana 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 6
7. Sukhchain Singh @ Chaini v. State of Punjab Case 2022 LiveLaw (P&H) 7
8. Gurmail Singh v. State of Punjab and another 2022 LiveLaw (P&H) 8
9. Bikram Singh Majithia Vs. State Of Punjab 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 9
10. Narendra Singh V. State Of Haryana 2022 LiveLaw (P&H) 10
11. Ramprastha Promoters And Developers Pvt. Ltd. v. Union Of India and Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 11
12. Sukhpal Singh Khaira v. Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 12
13. Maam Gujjar @ Maam Hussain v. State of Punjab 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 13
14. Sandeep Kumar v. State of Punjab and connected matters Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 14
15. Jagir Singh @ Sukha @ Pamma v. State of Punjab and another 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 15
16. Mamta Giri v. State of UT Chandigarh 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 16
17. Dr. Aparna Singhal v. State of Haryana and another 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 17
18. Narinder Singh & another v. State of Punjab and another 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 18
19. Sanjay v. State of Haryana 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 19
20. Managing Committee, Goswami Ganesh Dutt Sanatan Dharam College, Palwal & Others v. Sabir Hussain & others 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 20
21. Neha v. State of Haryana & another 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 21
22. Joginder Singh S/o Jai Singh v. the State of Haryana 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 22
23. D.N. Asija and others v. Union of India and others 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 23
24. Yuvraj Singh v. State of Haryana and another 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 24
25. Harbhajan Singh @ Bhajja v. State of Punjab 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 25
26. Nanu Kumar v. State Of Haryana and Others 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 26
27. D.N. Asija and others v. Union of India and others 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 27
28. Yuvraj Singh v. State of Haryana & Ors. Hon'ble Justice Amol Rattan Singh 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 28
29. Aseem Gaind V. Axis Bank, Retail Assets Centre 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 29
30. Arti Devi v. UT Chandigarh & others 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 30

31. Harbhajan Sandhu v. State of Punjab and Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 31

32. Jai Nrain and another v. State of Punjab and others 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 32 

33. Ankit And Others v. State Of Haryana 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 33

34. Vijay Mamgain Vs State of Haryana 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 34

35. Vineet vs State Of Haryana 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 35
36. Excise and Taxation Commissioner, Haryana Versus M/s Gupta Brother, Bhiwani and another 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 36
37. M/s Raghav Metals Versus State of Haryana and others 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 37

38. Shriram Housing Finance Limited v. State of Haryana and others. 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 38

39. Sudhir Kumar V. Padam Singh 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 39
40. Savita v. State Of Haryana 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 40
41. Mr.Monishankar Hazra and another v. State of Haryana and others and a connected petition 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 41
42. Sandeep Kaur and another v. Union Territory, Chandigarh 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 42
43. State of Haryana v. Asman and another and connected matter 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 43
44. Smt. Ritu @ Ridhima & Anr. v. Sandeep Singh Sangwan 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 44

45. Puran Chand Sharma v. State of Haryana 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 45

46. Commissioner Of Central Excise, Panchkula Versus M/S Riba Textiles Limited 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 46 

47. Amit Sureshmal Lodha v State of Haryana 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 47
48. Shailabh Mendiratta v. State Of Haryana And Anr 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 48
49. Smt. Khazani Devi Versus The Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court & others 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 49
50. Sunil Kumar Gulati v. State of Punjab and another 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 50
51. M/s Paras Ram Milkhi Ram versus Sudarshan Tea. Pvt. Ltd. and Another 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 51

Judgments/ Orders 

1. MCQ Exams- "Question Having No 'Most Appropriate Answer' Is Incapable Of Being Asked, Needs To Be Deleted": P&H High Court

Case title: Lovepreet Singh v. Haryana Public Service Commission and another

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (P&H) 1

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has recently observed that in a Multiple-Choice Question (MCQ) based examinations, a question which has no single, unique or 'most appropriate answer' (i.e., suspect question) becomes incapable of being asked. It further held that a suspect question in an MCQ based examination needs to be deleted so that no student gets advantage, or is denied advantage, because of evaluation of such questions.

2. "Prima Facie Accusation Not True": Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Bail To An Accused In 'Tarn Taran Bomb Blast' Case

Case title: Amarjeet Singh @ Amar Singh v. National Investigation Agency

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 2

The Punjab and Haryana High Court today granted bail to an accused in the 2019 Tarn Taran Bomb Blast case as it recorded that the accusation against him is not prima facie true and therefore, he is entitled to the benefit of regular bail during the pendency of the trial in the case.

3. Fixed Deposits Or Electronic Transfers A Bail Condition Likely To Improve Possibility Of Accused's Attendance: Punjab And Haryana High Court

Case Title: Mahidul Sheikh Vs. State of Haryana

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 3

The likelihood of an accused to attend the Court will increase if the accused knows that their money is safe and accruing interest and thus, fixed deposits or electronic transfer or creating lien over the bank, instead of cash or sureties as conditions for bail are better mediums to ensure that the accused does not flout Court's Order. A single judge bench of Punjab and Haryana High Court, presided by Justice Anoop Chitkara has further observed that the advancement in technology has obsoleted the identification through sureties and keeping in mind the menace of securing sureties by payment, substituting surety with fixed deposit/bank transfer/lien will also help in addressing the unethical practices taking place through a corrupt system of unscrupulous stock sureties.

4. Filing Supplementary Challan Should Not Be Deferred Merely Because Anticipatory Bail Application Is Pending: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Case Title: Sukhwinder Kaur @ Rajvir Kaur v. State of Punjab

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 4

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has recently held that filing of a supplementary Challan under Section 173 of CrPC cannot be deferred merely because an anticipatory bail application is pending. Such filing should not be deferred for long periods and whenever the same is deferred, specific and genuine reasons must be present for this, it said.

5. Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Bail To Man Accused Of Offence Prima Facie Less Serious Than Co-Accused Who Are On Bail

Case Title: Sahil v. State of Haryana

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 5

If the role attributed to the accused in an offence is prima facie less serious than the role attributed to the co-accused who have been granted the benefit of bail under S.438 CrPC and under S.439 CrPC, and if the accused is a first-time offender, then he deserves an opportunity to course-correct and the opportunity of bail cannot be denied to him. A single-judge bench of Punjab and Haryana High Court presided over by Justice Anoop Chitkara has recently observed that if the accused is a first-time offender and if his co-accused who were similarly placed, have been granted bail, even though the role of co-accused in the offence was more serious than that of the accused, then accused's bail application should be accepted and the accused should be given a chance for grant of bail.

6. 'Casteist' Remark: P&H High Court Dismisses Munmun Dutta's Pre Arrest Bail Plea, Allows Her To Approach Sessions Court

Case title - Mun Mun Dutta v. State of Haryana

Citation- 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 6

The Punjab and Haryana High Court today dismissed (as withdrawn) the anticipatory bail plea filed by actor Munmun Dutta (best known for her portrayal of Babita Iyer in the popular Hindi serial Taarak Mehta Ka Ooltah Chashmah) over 'Bhangi' remark, a casteist slur, allegedly made by her in a video posted in social media. The was hearing her plea filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail in May 2021 FIR (at Hansi) under Section 3(1)(u) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

7. Addl Sessions Judge Treats Regular Bail Plea As Anticipatory Bail Plea: Punjab & Haryana High Court Calls It 'Serious' Issue

Case title - Sukhchain Singh @ Chaini v. State of Punjab Case

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 7

The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently called into question a bail order passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Faridkot, treating a regular bail petition as an anticipatory bail petition, even when the accused had been in the custody at the time of filing the bail plea. Calling it a matter of 'serious concern', the Bench of Justice Jasgurpreet Singh Puri also sent the case file to the concerned Administrative Judge of District Faridkot for information and further necessary action, if so required, in accordance with the law.

8. Second FIR On Same Incident Is Abuse Of Process Of Law, May Be Quashed Without Awaiting Final Report U/S 173 CrPC: Punjab & Haryana HC

Case Title: Gurmail Singh v. State of Punjab and another

Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 8

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that if a second FIR is registered regarding an incident on which a prior FIR already exists, it amounts to abuse of process of law and the High Court is well within its powers under Section 482 CrPC to quash the same, without awaiting a final report under Section 173 CrPC.

9. Drugs Case: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dismisses Akali Leader Bikram Majithia's Pre-Arrest Bail Plea

Case title - Bikram Singh Majithia Vs. State Of Punjab

Citation- 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 9

The Punjab and Haryana High Court today dismissed the anticipatory bail plea of Akali Dal leader Bikram Singh Majithia filed in connection with a Drugs case registered against him. Last week, the Bench of Justice Lisa Gill had reluctantly inclined to adjourn the hearing on his bail plea and had extended his interim protection from arrest till January 24 (today) since his Counsel, R.S. Cheema, Senior Advocate had contracted COVID-19 and a request for an adjournment was made before the bench.

10. Consent Given During Prior Sexual Acts Won't Extend To Future Occasions: Punjab And Haryana High Court

Case title - Narendra Singh V. State Of Haryana

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 10

Stressing that law acknowledges a woman's right to have a sexual relationship, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has recently observed that the consent given during prior sexual acts won't extend to future occasions.

11. RERA ACT- Inconvenience In Making Pre-Deposits Not An Onerous Circumstance Warranting Relaxation Of A Statutory Mandate: Punjab And Haryana High Court

Case Title: Ramprastha Promoters And Developers Pvt. Ltd. v. Union Of India and Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 11

Mere hardship in making pre-deposits which include diverting funds is not an arduous circumstance in any manner and does not necessitate waiver of a statutory mandate, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has held.

12. Money Laundering Case- Former Punjab MLA And Congress Leader Sukhpal Khaira Granted Bail By P&H High Court

Case title - Sukhpal Singh Khaira v. Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 12

The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Thursday granted bail to former Punjab MLA and Congress leader, Sukhpal Singh Khaira in connection with a money laundering case, registered against him in January 2021 on account of his alleged involvement in the smuggling of heroin, gold, and, illegal weapons. The Bench of Justice Sureshwar Thakur was of the opinion that at this stage, it can't be concluded that the Khaira has committed the offence under the PML Act.

13. Alleged Easy Character Of Wife Not Indicative Of Her Abetting Husband's Suicide, Mens Rea A Necessary Concomitant Of Instigation: Punjab & Haryana HC

Case Title: Maam Gujjar @ Maam Hussain v. State of Punjab

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 13

If there is no prima facie case against the wife and no dying declaration or suicide note alleging the same, just the fact that she is allegedly a woman of easy character is not indicative of the wife abetting and inciting suicide of her husband, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has held.

14. "Drug Menace Touching New Heights In Punjab, State Police's Approach Casual": Punjab And Haryana High Court

Case title - Sandeep Kumar v. State of Punjab and connected matters

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 14

While allowing bail plea filed in connection with a drugs case, the Punjab and Haryana High Court recently rapped the Punjab Police for their "callously casual approach" towards their official duty even when the drug menace has become a deep-rooted in the state of Punjab. The Bench of Justice Meenakshi I. Mehta made this observation as it noted that in the Status reports/Reply filed in the bail pleas, the police officers, without realizing the repercussions and consequent legal implications, mentioned the tablets, allegedly recovered from the accused, as 'CLAVIDOL-100 SR' tablets. However, in some paras, the tablets were described as 'CLOVIDOL-100 SR'.

15. High Court's Powers U/S 482 CrPC Wide Enough To Quash FIR & Subsequent Proceedings Even For Non-Compoundable Offences: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Case Title: Jagir Singh @ Sukha @ Pamma v. State of Punjab and another

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 15

High Courts can exercise powers under Section 482 of CrPC to quash proceedings in non-compoundable offences, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has held. Although compounding of offences is governed under Section 320 of CrPC and non-compoundable offences are not covered in that Section, this limited jurisdiction of compounding an offence within is not an embargo against invoking inherent powers of High Court vested in it by Section 482 of CrPC to prevent abuse of law and to secure ends of justice, it is held.

16. S.82 CrPC Does Not Impose Any Restrictions On Filing Of Anticipatory Bail By Proclaimed Offenders: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Case title: Mamta Giri v. State of UT Chandigarh

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 16

If the offence committed is punishable with less than seven years, is a bailable, non-heinous offence and the accused who is a first-time offender, has established a fair ground for not being present in court, to the court's satisfaction, then just the fact that accused has been a proclaimed offender will not bar him/her from availing the benefit of Anticipatory Bail under S. 438 of CrPC, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has held.

17. 'Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques Act'- Police Can Probe Offence But Court Can Take Cognizance Only On Complaint Of Appropriate Authority: P&H HC

Case title - Dr. Aparna Singhal v. State of Haryana and another

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 17

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has observed that an FIR regarding an offence under the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Regulation and Prevention of Misuse) Act, 1994 [PCPNDT Act] can be lodged and investigation can be undertaken by the Police, however, cognizance of the offence can be taken by the Court only on the complaint made by the Appropriate Authority as per Section 28 of the Act.

18. Compromise Deed Must State Reasons For Settlement For Quashing Of FIR & Criminal Proceedings: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Case: Narinder Singh & another v. State of Punjab and another

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 18

High Courts are empowered under Section 482 of CrPC to quash FIR and further criminal proceedings, even for non-compoundable offences, if a compromise has been reached and the matter is personal. However, to seek such quashing, the compromise deed must not have inconsistencies and must state clear and specific reasons for the compromise, Punjab and Haryana High Court has held.

19. No Embargo In Treating Testimony Of A Child Witness As The Sole Basis For Conviction: Punjab And Haryana High Court

Case: Sanjay v. State of Haryana

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 19

Stating that statutorily, there exists no prohibition on child witnesses to depose in criminal or civil cases, except when the child does not understand the questions put to them, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has observed that when a child fully understands the questions and can provide answers regarding the same, rationally, then the testimony of a child witness can be the sole reason for conviction.

20. Service Law- An Employee Cannot Seek Protection Against the Dispensation of Services If He Attained The Employment by Fraud: Punjab and Haryana High Court

Case: Managing Committee, Goswami Ganesh Dutt Sanatan Dharam College, Palwal & Others v. Sabir Hussain & others

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 20

An employee cannot seek protection against the dispensation of services if he has attained the employment by fraud, giving forged documents, and misleading the hiring committee, specifically when his employment was offered to him based on such forged documents and he had also been afforded ample opportunity to make his case, Punjab and Haryana High Court has held.

21. "Right Of Convict To Have Conjugal Relations Isn't Absolute": Punjab & Haryana High Court Agrees With Madras HC's Recent Ruling

Case title - Neha v. State of Haryana & another

Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 21

In a significant ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has observed that the right of a convict to have conjugal relations is not an absolute one and is subject to 'reasonable restrictions', 'social order', 'security concerns', 'good behavior' in the jail, etc.

22. Public Prosecutor Must File Independent Report Justifying Detention Of Accused Beyond 180 Days U/S 36A(4) NDPS Act: Punjab & Haryana HC

Case: Joginder Singh S/o Jai Singh v. the State of Haryana

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 22

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that default bail to an accused charged under NDPS Act cannot be denied on the pretext of investigation not being complete within the stipulated period of 180 days, unless the Public Prosecutor, after he has independently applied his mind, files a report disclosing justification for keeping the accused in further custody to enable the investigating agency to complete the investigation.

23. High Rank Defence Personnel Drawing Lesser Pay Than Their Juniors: Punjab & Haryana High Court Asks Centre To Resolve Anomalies

Case Title: D.N. Asija and others v. Union of India and others

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 23

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has directed the Central Government to resolve the anomalies that crept in the defence pay scale with the implementation of 6th Central Pay Commission.

24. ['Bhangi' Remark] "No Intention To Insult But Word Used In Derogatory Sense": P&H HC Grants Partial Relief To Yuvraj Singh

Case title - Yuvraj Singh v. State of Haryana and another

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 24

The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Thursday granted partial relief to Cricketer Yuvraj Singh in a case registered against him for his alleged casteist remark 'Bhangi'. Partly allowing his quashing plea, the Court has quashed Sections 153-A and 153-B of the IPC in the FIR against him. The Bench of Justice Amol Rattan Singh has however clarified that the case/probe against him for an offence under Section 3 (1)(u) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities), Act, 1989 shall proceed as per the law.

25. "Punjab Was Once A Prosperous State But Is Now At The Brink Of Drug-Trafficking": P&H High Court

Case title - Harbhajan Singh @ Bhajja v. State of Punjab

Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 25

"The State of Punjab which was known as one of the prosperous States is now at the brink of drug trafficking," observed the Punjab and Haryana High Court while denying bail to an NDPS Accused.

26. ['Obscene' Posts Against Lord Krishna] "Offence Against Society, Not A Fit Case To Quash FIR Against Accused": P&H High Court

Case title - Nanu Kumar v. State Of Haryana and Others

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 26

The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently refused to quash an FIR filed against a man who has been booked for allegedly making remarks against Lord Shri Krishna on the holy festival of Shri Krishna Janamashtami and for putting out obscene pictures publicly observing that the alleged offence was an offence against the society at large and it was not a case of a private offence as in the instant case, society at large was affected by the alleged offence.

27. Resolve Pay Anomaly Issue Which Is Adversely Affecting Morale Of Defence Forces: Punjab & Haryana High Court To Centre

Case title - D.N. Asija and others v. Union of India and others

Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 27

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has asked the Central Government to take appropriate steps in removing pay anomaly while noting that it is adversely impacting and affecting the morale of the Defence Forces.

28. Bhangi Remark: Punjab & Haryana High Court Refuses To Quash FIR Against Yuvraj Singh

Case: Yuvraj Singh v. State of Haryana & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 28

Court partly allowed his plea by quashing charges under Sections 153-A & 153-B of IPC. Punjab and Haryana High Court has recently rejected the petition seeking quashing of FIR against the cricketer Yuvraj Singh, in Hansi, Haryana for using the word 'Bhangi' during an Instagram live. Singh was booked for alleged commission of offences under S.153A and S.153B of IPC and S.3(1)(u) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

29. Borrower Can't Seek Time Extension To Repay Balance 'One Time Settlement' Amount As A Matter Of Right: P&H High Court

Case title - ASEEM GAIND v. AXIS BANK, RETAIL ASSETS CENTRE

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 29

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has observed that the High Court has the power to grant an extension of time for completion of the loan repayment under the OTS (One Time Settlement) Scheme, however, such power can't be invoked at the instance of the borrower as a matter of right. The bench of Justice M. S. Ramachandra Rao and Justice J. S. Bedi also held that it is not open for the Public Sector Banks or Private Sector Banks to decline OTS sought by a borrower, provided he/she falls within the OTS Policy being followed by the Bank.

30. "Govt Hospitals Can't Deny Treatment On The Ground Of Place Of Residence": Punjab And Haryana High Court

Case title - Arti Devi v. UT Chandigarh & others

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 30

The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently clarified that a government Hospital can't deny treatment to someone on the ground that he/she is not a resident of the area where the hospital is located.

31. S. 306 IPC | Merely Being Named In Suicide Note Doesn't Establish Guilt Of Accused, Proximate Link Between Alleged Abetment & Suicide A Must: P&H HC

Case: Harbhajan Sandhu v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 31

The ingredients of abetment must be fulfilled to establish the abetment of suicide under Section 306 of IPC and merely a suicide note with the name of the accused shall not suffice for the same, Punjab and Haryana High Court has held.

Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi has held that in addition to there being a requirement of mens rea pointing to instigation by the accused to goad the deceased into committing suicide, there must be a proximate and live link present between such abetment and the consequent suicide, to establish the offence of abetment to suicide under S.306 of IPC.

32. Time To Shift Perspective From 'Didactics' Of Orthodox Society: P&H High Court Orders Police Protection For A Live In Couple

Case title - Jai Nrain and another v. State of Punjab and others

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 32

While granting police protection to a live-in relationship couple, the Punjab and Haryana High Court last week observed that there is a need to shift perspective from didactics of the orthodox society, shackled with the strong strings of morality supported by religions to one that values an individual's life above all.

The Bench of Justice Anoop Chitkara observed thus while hearing a protection plea filed by one Jai Nrain and his Live-In Partner, a married woman, who had moved the Court fearing for their lives and liberty at the hands of the private respondents.

33. Section 377 IPC Attracted Even When Penetration With Sexual Intent Happens On Any Part Of Body Other Than Vagina: P&H High Court

Case title - Ankit And Others v. State Of Haryana

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 33

In a significant observation and widening the scope of Section 377 of IPC (Unnatural offences), the Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that this offence is attracted even in a situation where the penetration happens to be on any other part of the body of a victim (other than Vagina) with sexual intent.

34. Owner Of Vehicle Not Vicariously Liable For Any Misdeclaration By Owner Of Goods: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Case Title: Vijay Mamgain Vs State of Haryana

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 34

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that the owner of the vehicle who is seeking only release of the vehicle is not liable to pay fine for the confiscated goods.

The division bench of Justice Ajay Tewari and Pankaj Jain has observed that to force the owner of the vehicle to pay the tax, penalty and fine on the goods would mean that the owner of the vehicle is also foisted with the vicarious liability of any mis-declaration/fraud by the owner of the goods despite the proviso engrafted on to Sub Section 2 of Section 130 of the CGST Act.

35. Absence Of Proof Of Motive Does Not Break Link In 'Chain Of Circumstances' Connecting Accused With Crime: P&H HC Upholds Conviction In Dowry Death Case

Case Title: Vineet vs State Of Haryana

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 35

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that even though 'motive' bears significance in cases of circumstantial evidences, however, failure to prove the same may not necessarily be fatal to the prosecution case if otherwise the chain of circumstances linking the accused with the alleged crime stands established.

36. VAT ITC Can Be Availed On Evaporation Loss Of Petrol, HSD: Punjab and Haryana High Court

Case Title: Excise and Taxation Commissioner, Haryana Versus M/s Gupta Brother, Bhiwani and another

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 36

The Punjab and Haryana High Court bench consisting of Justice Ajay Tewari, Justice Avnish Jhingan and Justice Pankaj Jain has ruled that the Input Tax Credit (ITC) under the Value Added Tax can be availed on the evaporation loss of petrol and High Speed Diesel (HSD).

37. "Intention To Evade Tax" Must Be Directly Connected to Activity Of Trader: Punjab and Haryana High Court

Case Title: M/s Raghav Metals Versus State of Haryana and others

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 37

The Punjab and Haryana High Court bench of Justice Ajay Tewari and Justice Pankaj Jain has held that the intention to evade tax must be directly connected to the activity of the trader.

38. "A District Magistrate, After Passing An Order Under Sec.14 Of The SARFAESI Act Does Not Have Any Jurisdiction To Review, Recall Or Modify It": Punjab and Haryana HC

Case Title: Shriram Housing Finance Limited v. State of Haryana and others.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 38

Punjab and Haryana High Court on March 14, 2022, answered various significant questions regarding Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act.

The court had an occasion to discuss the scope of jurisdiction of the district magistrate to review, recall or modify an order passed under Sec.14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. Along with that, the court also delved into the issue of non-enforcement of the order when the husband and daughter of the deceased borrower were absent as parties in the application under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act.

The Division Bench comprising Justice Ramachandra Rao and Justice H.S. Madaan held that a District Magistrate, after passing an order under Sec.14 of the SARFAESI Act,2002 has no jurisdiction to review or recall it.

39. When Signature On Cheque Is Admitted Then Question For Appointment Of Handwriting Expert Doesn't Arise: PH High Court

Case title - SUDHIR KUMAR v. PADAM SINGH

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 39

The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently upheld the view taken by the lower court that when signature over a cheque in question has not been specifically denied then there is no question for the appointment of a handwriting expert to compare the handwriting over the cheque in question.

40. "She Had Conspired To Get Her Daughter Killed On Account Of 'Compromising Their Honour', P&H High Court Denies Bail To Mother In Honour Killing Case

Case Title : Savita V State Of Haryana

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 40

Punjab and Haryana High Court on March 11, 2022, dismissed the plea for regular bail of the petitioner who is involved in a case of honour killing of the minor daughter. The bench of Justice Gurvinder Singh Gill rejected the bail plea of the petitioner and directed the Trial to be expedited.

41. Second FIR Can Be Quashed If First FIR In Respect To Same Incident Has Already Been Registered: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Case title - Mr.Monishankar Hazra and another v. State of Haryana and others and a connected petition

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 41

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has observed that in case an FIR with respect to an incident has already been registered, then a second FIR with respect to the same incident cannot be registered and in case, the same is registered then the High Court is well within its power to quash the second FIR.

42. Court Can't Direct Complainant/ Victim To Give Specimen Signatures U/S 311A CrPC: Punjab And Haryana High Court

Case title - Sandeep Kaur and another v. Union Territory, Chandigarh

Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 42

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has recently clarified that Section 311A CrPC doesn't allow the Court to make an order directing a complainant or a victim to give specimen signatures or handwriting for the purposes of any investigation or proceedings under the Code.

43. Sanction Order For Prosecution A Public Document U/S 74(1) (iii) Of Indian Evidence Act : Punjab And Haryana High Court

Case title : State of Haryana v. Asman and another and connected matter

Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 43

The Punjab and Haryana High Court last week observed that a sanction order (for prosecution) is a public document within the meaning of Section 74(1) (iii) of the Indian Evidence Act and therefore, the certified copy prepared of the same under Section 76/77 of the Evidence Act is admissible in evidence.

44. "False Assertions Ought To Be Discouraged": PH High Court On Woman's Conduct Of Hiding Job Status, Earning In Maintenance Plea

Case title - Smt. Ritu @ Ridhima & Anr. v. Sandeep Singh Sangwan

Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 44

The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently observed that false assertions should be discouraged by parties while they come tot he Court seeking reliefs. The Court observed thus in connection with a case of a woman who hid her job details and her earnings in a maintenance plea filed by her under Section 125 of CrPC.

45. 'Judicial Indiscipline' : P&H High Court Recommends Departmental Action Against Magistrate For Violating HC Direction

Case Title: Puran Chand Sharma v. State of Haryana

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 45

A single bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court has recommended departmental action against a Chief Judicial Magistrate for violating a High Court direction in a case.

Observing that the Magistrate's action not only showed lack of understanding of fundamental principles of law but also reflected judicial indiscipline, Justice Manoj Bajaj referred the matter to the Chief Justice for initiating departmental action.

46. Claim Of Refund And Interest Shall Be Dealt Under The Existing Law On Central Excise And Not As Per CGST Act. Punjab & Haryana High Court Rejects The Plea Of Revenue

Case Title: Commissioner Of Central Excise, Panchkula Versus M/S Riba Textiles Limited

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 46

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that the revenue department cannot take the plea of transfer of jurisdiction due to GST regime against assessee's claim for refund of central excise duty and interest.

The Bench, consisting of Justices Ajay Tewari and Pankaj Jain, ruled that the Income Tax Act, 1961 and Central Excise Act, 1944 are pari materia and an assessee was entitled to interest on delayed refund of central excise duty in light of the Supreme Court ruling in Sandvik Asia Ltd versus CIT, Pune (2006).

47. Fundamental Right To Travel Abroad Can Be Regulated By Imposing Conditions: Punjab & Haryana HC Permits Accused To Visit USA For Family Reunion

Case Title : Amit Sureshmal Lodha v State of Haryana

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 47

Punjab and Haryana High Court recently permitted an Overseas Indian citizen, booked for offences of Cheating and Criminal breach of trust by the Reawri Police, to visit the United States of America for a family reunion. The bench comprising Justice Vikas Bahl held that the petitioner has a fundamental right to travel abroad, which can be regulated by imposing certain conditions on him. It observed that the Court is required to "draw a balance" between the right of the petitioner to travel abroad on one hand and the right of the prosecution on another.

48. Using Term 'Straight Shooter' In Message Doesn't Amount To 'Extortion' Or 'Criminal Intimidation': Punjab & Haryana High Court

Case title - Shailabh Mendiratta v. State Of Haryana And Anr

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 48

The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently quashed an FIR against a man who had been booked under Sections 386 [Extortion by putting a person in fear of death or grievous hurt] & 506 [Punishment for criminal intimidation] IPC for allegedly sending a WhatsApp message to the complainant using the term 'straight shooter' to extort money.

49. Even In Absence Of Prescribed Statutory Limitation, Party Expected To Approach Court Within 'Reasonable Time': Punjab & Haryana High Court

Case Title: Smt. Khazani Devi Versus The Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court & others

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 49

Punjab and Haryana High Court has reiterated that in the absence of any prescribed limitation, it has to be a reasonable time within which the party aggrieved has to approach the court.

50. Production Of Certificate U/S 65B(4) Evidence Act Not Necessary To Obtain Voice Sample Of Accused For Further Probe: PH High Court

Case title - Sunil Kumar Gulati v. State of Punjab and another

Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 50

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has observed that at the stage of filing an application by the prosecution to obtain the voice sample of the accused for the purposes of further investigation, the production of a certificate under Section 65B(4) of the Evidence Act is not necessary.

51. Summons By Registered Post AD Can't Be Served Directly On Defendant Residing Outside Court's Jurisdiction: Punjab & Haryana HC

Case Title: M/s Paras Ram Milkhi Ram versus Sudarshan Tea. Pvt. Ltd. and Another

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 51

Punjab and Haryana High Court has made it clear that Summons by registered post acknowledgement due cannot directly be sent by the Court where the suit is instituted to a defendant residing outside its jurisdiction. The bench comprising Justice Alka Sarin held,

"where the defendant resides outside the jurisdiction of the Court in which the suit is instituted and the Court directs that summons on such a defendant be served by registered post acknowledgement due, such summons have to be first sent to the Court having jurisdiction where the defendant resides and that Court would thereupon proceed to serve the defendant as if the summons were issued by that Court."

Other Updates

1. Prolonged Incarceration: Punjab & Haryana High Court Suspends Sentence Of 10 NDPS Accused Citing Article 21

Bhupender Singh Vs. Narcotic Control Bureau and other connected matters

The Punjab and Haryana High Court allowed 10 petitions filed seeking suspension of sentence in cases under the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 by referring to Article 21 of the Constitution on account of the prolonged incarceration of the petitioners in those matters. Importantly, while relying upon SC's 1994 Judgment [Supreme Court Legal Aid Committee representing Undertrial Prisoners vs. Union of India, 1994(6) SCC 731], wherein it had held that a person who had undergone five years of pre-convict custody was entitled to be released on bail, on the touchstone of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The High Court noted that though this judgment related to undertrials and only one time directions were issued, however, the directions in no way can be said to be against the legislative intent but are in furtherance of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

2. Entire Police Station Including Interrogation Rooms Need To Be Under CCTV Coverage As Per SC's Order: High Court To Punjab, Haryana DGPs

Kaushal v. State of Haryana and others

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has made it clear that as per the directions of the Supreme Court, no part of the police stations should be left uncovered by CCTV surveillance and this CCTV Coverage would necessarily include the interrogation rooms. The Bench of Justice Amol Rattan Singh observed thus as it sought the response of DGP, Haryana, the DGP, Punjab, as also the DGP, U.T., Chandigarh regarding the compliance of the Supreme Court's order in Paramvir Singh Saini v. Baljit Singh and others (2021) 1 SCC 184. Here it may be noted that in Paramvir Singh Sain's case, the Supreme Court had observed that the State and Union Territory Governments should ensure that CCTV cameras are installed in each and every Police Station functioning under them.

Latest Development: [CCTVs In Police Stations] Punjab, Haryana Submit Timeline In High Court To Implement Supreme Court's Order

Protection Petitions: P&H High Court Makes Declaration Regarding Status Of Minor Children From First Marriage Mandatory

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has made it mandatory for parties moving the High Court with their protection pleas in case of Live-in relationships or second marriage, despite subsisting marriages, to declare the status of the minor children from their first marriage, if any.

4. "Intention Of Punjab, Haryana States Present But Efforts Lagging": High Court On Slow Pace Of Probe In Cases Against MPs/MLAs

Court On Its Own Motion vs. State Of Punjab And Others

Perusing the status report filed by the States of Punjab and Haryana regarding the probe into the criminal cases against the Lawmakers (MPs/MLAs), the Punjab and Haryana High Court on Wednesday observed that the intention to probe cases on the part of the states is present, however, their actions in this regard are lagging.

5. Punjab & Haryana High Court Stays Haryana Law Granting 75% Job Quota For Locals In Pvt Sector

Faridabad Industries Association v. State of Haryana and Another

The Punjab and Haryana High Court today granted an interim stay on the Haryana government's law providing for 75% reservation for state domicile in the private sector on a Writ petition challenging the vires of the Haryana State Employment of Local Candidates Act 2020.

6. 'Casteist' Remark Case: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Interim Anticipatory Bail To Actress Munmun Dutta

Mun Mun Dutta Vs State Of Haryana

The Punjab and Haryana High Court today granted interim anticipatory bail to Actress Munmun Dutta (best known for her portrayal of Babita Iyer in the popular Hindi serial Taarak Mehta Ka Ooltah Chashmah) over 'Bhangi' remark, a casteist slur, allegedly made by her in a video posted in social media.

7. Can A State Restrict Employment On The Basis Of Domicile?: Punjab & Haryana High Court To Examine

Faridabad Industries Association v. State of Haryana and another

While putting an interim stay on the implementation of Haryana state's law providing for 75% reservation for state domicile in the private sector, the Punjab and Haryana High Court underscored that the core issue which is to be examined is - whether any State can restrict employment (even in the private sector) on the basis of domicile.

Also Read: "Can't Absolve UOI Of Its Duty To File Reply On Pleas Against Haryana's 75% Job Quota For Locals Law": P&H High Court

Gurmeet Singh Not A "Hardcore' Prisoner": Haryana Defends Move To Release Him On Furlough Before High Court

The Haryana State has defended its move to release Dera Sacha Sauda chief Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh on Furlough (for a period of three weeks from February 7 to February 27) before the Punjab and Haryana High Court by stating that he is not a hardcore prisoner.

9. Punjab And Haryana High Court Withdraws Order Extending Life Of Interim Orders In View Of Improved COVID Situation

Court on its own motion v. Union of India and others

With improvement in the COVID situation in the states of Punjab, Haryana, and UT Chandigarh, the Punjab and Haryana High Court on Monday withdrew its April 2021 order extending the life of interim orders pertaining to the functioning of courts, orders of eviction, dispossession, demolition, so far unexecuted, etc. It may be noted that restoring a suo moto case registered in the year 2021, the Punjab and Haryana High Court had, in January 2022, extended the life of all interim orders passed by the High Court and courts subordinate to it, including the Tribunals till February 28, 2022.

10. Punjab's Advocate General Deepinder S. Patwalia Resigns In View Of Apparent Change In Government

Punjab's Advocate General Deepinder S. Patwalia Resigns In View Of Apparent Change In Government

Advocate-General for Punjab Deepinder Singh Patwalia has resigned from his post in view of an apparent change in the State Government. It may be noted that as per the official results of the recently concluded state assembly elections, the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) is set to form the Government in the state.

11. "Specify Proposal To Deal With Cases Of Live In Couples Not Of Marriageable Age": Punjab & Haryana High Court To Centre

Rohit Kumar v. Stae of U.T. Chandigarh and others and connected pleas

Noting that the Court is being flooded with pleas filed by live-In Couples, not of marriageable age, seeking protection of life and liberty, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has asked the Union Government to specify its proposal to deal with such cases. Observing that no Act governs any such relationship and once a person has attained majority in terms of the Majority Act, 1875, (i.e. 18 years of age), it would be difficult for a court to refuse such protection, the Bench Justice Amol Rattan Singh sought a response of the centre in this regard.

12. Justice Ajay Tewari Of Punjab And Haryana High Court Resigns

Justice Ajay Tewari Of Punjab And Haryana High Court Resigns

Justice Ajay Tewari of Punjab and Haryana High Court has resigned from his office. He was due to retire on April 6, 2022. He is the second senior most judge of the High court after Chief Justice Ravi Shanker Jha.

13. Senior Advocate Anmol Rattan Sidhu Appointed As The New Advocate General For Punjab

Senior Advocate Anmol Rattan Sidhu Appointed As The New Advocate General For Punjab

Senior Advocate Anmol Ratan Singh Sidhu has been appointed as Punjab's new Advocate General by State's Governor today.