- Home
- /
- News Updates
- /
- Punjab & Haryana High Court Weekly...
Punjab & Haryana High Court Weekly Round-Up : May 30 - June 5, 2022
Drishti Yadav
6 Jun 2022 6:45 AM GMT
Nominal IndexMunshi Ram versus Vidya Devi and Another 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 121Sharma Constructions Joint Venture Versus Punjab Agro Industries Corporation Ltd. and another 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 122Gurmahabir Singh v. State of Punjab 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 123Paramjeet @ Kala and Other v. State of Haryana 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 124Jaswant Kaur v. Lakhwinder Singh and others 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 125Bhakra...
Nominal Index
Munshi Ram versus Vidya Devi and Another 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 121
Sharma Constructions Joint Venture Versus Punjab Agro Industries Corporation Ltd. and another 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 122
Gurmahabir Singh v. State of Punjab 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 123
Paramjeet @ Kala and Other v. State of Haryana 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 124
Jaswant Kaur v. Lakhwinder Singh and others 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 125
Bhakra Beas Management Board & another Versus Jagdish Ram 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 126
Ayyub Khan and Anr v. Pratap Gurjar and Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 127
Rohtash @ Raju v. State of Haryana 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 128
Lawrence Bishnoi v. State of Punjab and others 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 129
Malook Singh v. State of Punjab 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 130
Manpreet Kaur Versus Gurbaksh Singh 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 131
Mukesh Mittal Versus National Faceless Assessment Centre and others 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 132
Ishiqa @ Yashika Vs State of Haryana and others 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 133
Om Roj v. Haryana Staff Selection Commission and Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 134
Judgments/ Orders of the Week
Case Title: Munshi Ram versus Vidya Devi and Another
Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 121
The Punjab and Haryana High Court while dealing with a revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order of the Rent Controller whereby the application for directing the respondents-landlord to produce relevant documents in their possession was dismissed, has held that the present petition is nothing but an endeavour to embark on an endeavour not relevant to the matter in dispute. A Court would not embark on a roving and fishing enquiry in order to assist a party to collect evidence.
Case Title: Sharma Constructions Joint Venture Versus Punjab Agro Industries Corporation Ltd. and another
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 122
Punjab and Haryana High Court has upheld an order vide which Sharma Constructions Joint Venture was declared technically non-compliant for e-tender floated by Punjab Agro Industries for the supply of gypsum for agriculture use, on the ground of being ineligible. The Court noted that the expert committee of the authorities had examined the issue detail and found the petitioner to be ineligible. The bench observed that a perusal of the Joint Venture Agreement would indicate that there is no clause indicating as to who would be managing the Joint Venture. On the contrary, the document indicates that in spite of constituting the so called Joint Venture, the constituents/ proprietors would continue to manage their own separate firms.
Case Title : Gurmahabir Singh v. State of Punjab
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 123
Punjab and Haryana High Court recently came across a case where the original order of conviction passed by the Trial Court was modified under the signature of the Reader of the Court, during the pendency of an appeal preferred by the convict against the said judgment, thereby enhancing the sentence of the convict from 2 months to two years, held that though all these points need to be decided by the Sessions Judge, Tarn Taran, who herself is administrative head of the Sessions Division, Tarn Taran and on the face of it, it requires an inquiry as to how the corrections were made under the signatures of the Reader of the Court concerned, thereby enhancing the sentence, though in the original order, passed by the trial Court, it was only directed that instead of Section 323 IPC, which is mentioned at two places, Section 326 IPC be substituted at one place and there was no such direction to enhance the sentence from 02 months to 02 years.
Case Title : Paramjeet @ Kala and Other v. State of Haryana 
Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 124
The Punjab and Haryana High Court while dealing with an appeal filed by three appellants against the order whereby they were convicted for robbery, if the witness was not confronted with that part of the statement with which the defence wanted to contradict him, then the Court cannot suo moto make use of statements to police not proved in compliance with Section 145 of the Evidence Act that is, by drawing attention to the parts intended for contradiction.
Case Title : Jaswant Kaur v. Lakhwinder Singh and others
Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 125
Punjab and Haryana High Court while dealing with an appeal filed by the widow claiming right over the suit property on the basis of natural succession, held that appellant's husband was not the owner of the suit land on the date of his death, therefore, the question of inheritance of the estate does not arise.
Case Title: Bhakra Beas Management Board & another Versus Jagdish Ram
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 126
The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently upheld the order of a single Judge, directing the Bhakra Beas Management Board to give the benefit of 9 years promotional scale to one of its employees, (original petitioner) since the benefit had been extended to a junior. The court observed that the benefit of the circular had been given to the junior who was appointed as Khansama-cum-Chowkidar and the petitioner had already been promoted to that post thus, making him senior but he had not been granted the benefit of 9 years of promotional scale.
Case Title: Ayyub Khan and Anr v. Pratap Gurjar and Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 127
The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently allowed the plea of bereaved parents, seeking release of 50% compensation amount that was granted towards loss of their child in a motor accident, to be released from 3 years Fixed Deposit. Justice Alka Sarin referred to the case of H.S. Ahammed Hussain vs. Irfan Ahammed, [2002(3) RCR (Civil) 563], where the Supreme Court held that the amount of compensation awarded in favor of the mothers should not be kept in a fixed deposit in a nationalized bank.
Case Title: Rohtash @ Raju v. State of Haryana
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 128
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that in cases under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, FSL report goes to the root of the case and hence a charge sheet filed without it cannot be treated as a complete chargesheet. It further observed that an application under Section 36A(4) of the NDPS Act seeking extension of period for investigation must be supported by a report of public prosecutor which indicates the progress of the investigation and further specifies the compelling reasons for seeking the detention of the accused beyond the period of 180 days.
Case title: Lawrence Bishnoi v. State of Punjab and others
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 129
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has dismissed a plea filed by Lawrence Bishnoi in connection with the murder of renowned Punjabi Singer Sidhu Moosewala 29, seeking necessary security arrangements, apprehending a fake encounter by the Punjab Police. Calling the petition 'premature', the Bench of Justice Sureshwar Thakur took into account the submission made by Advocate General, Punjab that Bishnoi has not been nominated as an accused in connection with Moosewala's death, therefore, Bishnoi's apprehensions are completely premature.
Case Title : Malook Singh v. State of Punjab
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 130
The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently granted bail to an accused, incarcerated since over two years in connection with alleged offences under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. "Keeping in view the fact that the petitioner has been in custody for a period of 02 years, 09 months and 14 days and the trial is likely to take time, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in detention any longer," Justice Alka Sarin said.
Case Title: Manpreet Kaur Versus Gurbaksh Singh
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 131
The Punjab and Haryana High Court while dealing with a transfer petition invoking Section 24 of CrPC filed by the wife seeking transfer of matrimonial petition u/s 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, held that the distance of sixty kilometers between Bathinda and Faridkot is small, hence it is not an overwhelming reason for this Court to order the transfer of the matter. The applicant wife can appropriately instruct her counsel whenever her presence is not essential and therefore mere such a small distance is no overwhelming reason for this Court to order transfer of the matter.
Case Title: Mukesh Mittal Versus National Faceless Assessment Centre and others
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 132
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that when a draft assessment order/show cause notice is issued to an assessee, reasonable time ought to be furnished to respond to the notice, so as to comply with the principles of natural justice. Observing thus, a bench comprising Justice Tejinder Singh Dhindsa and Justice Pankaj Jain set aside the re-assessment order passed by the respondent authorities under Section 147 read with Section 144-B of the Income Tax Act 1961 on the very next day.
Case Title: Ishiqa @ Yashika Vs State of Haryana and others
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 133
The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently directed the Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam to pay compensation of Rs. 95 lakh to the petitioner, a minor girl who got electrocuted from a broken electric pole lying on the street with live electric wires attached to it, resulting in amputation of both arms. The bench comprising Justice Jaishree Thakur held that the facts of the case in hand lead to application of principle of "strict liability" and that in an incident of this nature, inference can be drawn that there has been an element of carelessness on the part of the Electricity Board in maintaining the supply line.
Case Title: Om Roj v. Haryana Staff Selection Commission and Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 134
The Punjab and Haryana High Court held that in matters pertaining to the appointment to any office under the State, the general category seats are to be filled from the merit list first and thereafter, the reserved category seats are to be allocated as per the assigned quota. Thus, regardless of whether a candidate is found or not found entitled to reservation sought by him, he still has a right to be considered in an open general category as per the intent of Article 16 of the Indian Constitution, Justice Arun Monga held.
Other updates
Case title: Ajay Pal Singh Middukhera v. State Of Punjab And Others
Brother of the slain Youth Akali Dal (YAD) leader Vicky Middukhera has moved to the Punjab and Haryana High Court seeking adequate protection in view of the alleged threat perception from the gang members. Vicky's elder brother Ajaypal Singh Middukhera has moved this plea. The bench of Justice Karamjit Singh has asked the State of Punjab and Punjab Police to look into representation (submitted earlier by Ajay Pal Sigh) and assess threat perception and if the situation so warrants to do the needful in accordance with law and to submit its report in this regard by the next date of hearing (August 18, 2022).
Case title: Om Prakash Soni v. State Of Punjab And Ors.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Monday asked the Punjab State Government as to how the list of persons whose security was withdrawn by it, came out in the public domain. The State Government has been asked to respond to the Court's query by June 2. The bench further added that the relevant information as to whether the order has become public on account of any RTI information or leakage or in collusion of someone having access to the order in question be also brought on record by the adjourned date.
Case title: Harkirat Singh Ghuman v Punjab and Haryana HC
The Supreme Court on Wednesday expressed concerns at the manner in which the Punjab & Haryana High Court had conducted Punjab and Haryana Superior Judicial Services Main Written Examination- 2019. The bench noted that the High Court is conducting examinations for District Judges... courts come down heavily on educational institutions when they conduct exams in a flip flop manner. The manner in which the exam has been conducted is troubling us.
Case Title: Raveena Tandon & Ors v State of Punjab & Ors.
The Punjab & Haryana High Court on Wednesday directed the Punjab Police to not take any coercive steps against Bollywood actress Raveena Tandon, filmmaker Farah Khan, comedian Bharti Singh, Screen Player, Writer Abbas Aziz Dalal & Frames Production in connection with a FIR lodged against them for allegedly hurting religious sentiments during a web show titled as 'Backbenchers' released by Flipkart. It was alleged in the FIR that the petitioners had hurt the religious sentiments of the Christian community by comparing the word "Hallelujah" with a vulgar word & had disrespected the said word.
