Citations [2025 LiveLaw (PH) 01 - 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 261]24X7 Helpline, Decide Representation In 3 Days: Punjab & Haryana HC Issues Guidelines To State, Police For Runaway Couples Seeking ProtectionTitle: XXX v. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERSCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 01The Punjab and Haryana High Court has issued a slew of guidelines to be followed by the State and Police when it is...
Citations [2025 LiveLaw (PH) 01 - 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 261]
Title: XXX v. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 01
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has issued a slew of guidelines to be followed by the State and Police when it is approached by an individual or a run away couple, alleging threat to their life and liberty.
In his 23-page order made available on December 24, 2024, Justice Sandeep Moudgil said, "It is need of the hour that a mechanism needs to be framed by the States with the aim for expeditious inquiry consisting of facts finding and adjudication of the dispute at the administrative level which are primarily in the nature of dissent of elders in a family to the wishes and desire of younger ones due to multifacet reasons which need not to be gone at this stage by this Court."
Title: ICICI BANK LTD. v. M/S ORIENT CLOTHING CO. PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 02
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has made it clear that a party cannot invoke the alternative jurisdiction in a dispute once they have decided the territorial jurisdiction by way of entering into a valid contract.
The bench of Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice Sudeepti Sharma said if the contract is validly executed wherein the parties have consensually conferred the jurisdiction of a court, then the party is "estopped from negating it."
Title: Kuldeep Kumar Sharma v. Randeep Rana
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 03
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has made it clear that Local Commissioner is not a witness of any party and the discretion lies with the Executing Court to permit or refuse to examine the Commissioner.
Justice Deepak Gupta said "the Local Commissioner appointed by the Court is not a witness for any of the party. In fact, he performs his duty as an extended arm of the court and thus to all intent and purposes, he is an officer of the Court."
Title: Amit Katyal v. CBI
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 04
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has upheld the order summoning an additional accused to face trial in the Gurugram land acquisition scam, allegedly involving then Haryana Chief Minister Bhupinder Singh Hooda and others from the Industrial Model Township.
Justice Kuldeep Tiwari opined that there are sufficient incriminating evidence which require the Petitioner- Amit Katyal, who was the Director of the company allegedly involved in the scam, to face trial along with other co-accused.
Title: Devender v. State of Haryana [along with connected matters]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 05
The Punjab & Haryana High Court set aside the conviction in a murder case against multiple accused persons wherein the Trial Court gave a common verdict after reviewing its earlier order directing to try them separately.
Title: PARVEEN ALIAS DADA v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 06
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has upheld the preventive detention of Haryana's alleged Azad gang member Parveen alias Dada under the National Security Act, 1980.
Among other grounds, it was argued that the State authorities did not follow the timeline provided under Section 3(5) of NSA.
Case Title: X v/s Y
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 07
The Punjab & Haryana High has said that the "ordinary residence of a child" or a ward would determine which court would have jurisdiction to decide the child's custody under the Guardianship & Wards Act.
It further underscored that the "ordinary residence" of the child would determine the court's jurisdiction which can hear the custody case, and the "natural guardianship" of the child will not determine this jurisdiction. The court further emphasized that the two concepts cannot be superimposed.
Title: Sobia Mujib v. State of Punjab and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 08
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that once a family member has availed the benefit of compassionate appointment, the same cannot be granted to another family member after the service of that family member had been terminated.
In the present case, the appellant's brother was appointed on compassionate grounds in position of her father, who passed away during service. However, the brother absented himself from duty, and his service was terminated. Thereafter, the appellant sought the appointment in place of his brother.
Title: Ashu v. State of Punjab
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 09
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has made it clear that while adjudicating anticipatory bail under NDPS, the manner in which the petitioner has been arraigned or implicated is a required to be seen.
Justice Sumeet Goel explained, “The final evidentiary value and admissibility of the disclosure statement made by a co-accused fall within the domain of the trial Court and are to be adjudicated during the course of the trial in accordance with established principles of law. However, while adjudicating a plea for anticipatory bail, this court cannot remain oblivious to the circumstances under which the petitioner has been arraigned or implicated, including the nature of the allegations, the evidence linking the petitioner to the offence as well as the specific role attributed to the petitioner in the commission of the alleged offence.”
Title: Amit Kumar Aggarwal and others v. Bimla Devi
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 10
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has said that single judge passing order allowing to withdraw the contempt plea with liberty to revive it during the pendency of appeal is unnecessary intrusion into the appellate jurisdiction.
While hearing a contempt plea the single judge had noted that "...counsel for the petitioner does not press the present petition at this stage with liberty to seek revival, if required, subject to final outcome of the aforesaid contempt appeal.Ordered accordingly..."
Title: Kulwinder v. State of Punjab
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 11
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has made it clear that the grant of bail in a case pertaining to commercial quantity, on the ground of undue delay in trial, cannot be said to be fettered by Section 37 of the NDPS Act, 1985.
As per Section 37 of the NDPS Act, the Court can grant bail to an accused in case of commercial quantity only after hearing the public prosecutor. If the prosecutor opposes bail, the accused has to satisfy the court that (a) there are reasonable grounds for believing that he is not guilty of such an offence and that (b) he is not likely to commit any offence after being released from jail. This provision makes it difficult to secure bail in NDPS cases.
Title: Khalid v State of Haryana
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 12
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has expressed concern about increasing litigation under the Haryana Gauvansh Sanrakshan and Gausamvardhan Act, observing that the objective of the Act was to curtail the "consumption of beef menace emanating from the powerful meat lobby consuming and selling beef" but State is not executing properly. The Court rejected the anticipatory bail plea of the accused who was apprehending arrest for allegedly being the owner the pick up vehicle used for carrying the cows for slaughtering.
Title: XXX v. FORTIS HOSPITAL MOHALI AND OTHERS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 13
The Punjab & Haryana High Court held that a woman living separately from her husband without obtaining divorce can terminate pregnancy without taking consent from the husband under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act.
Justice Kuldeep Tiwari referring to X Vs. Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department and Anr and, Rule 3(B)(c) of the The Medical Termination of Pregnancy Rules, 2003 said, "giving a purposive interpretation to the expression “change of marital status”, this Court can safely conclude that although the petitioner does not fall within the purview of “widow or divorcee”, however, since she has decided to live separately from the company of her husband without legally obtaining divorce, hence she is eligible for termination of pregnancy."
Title: Gulmohar Township India Pvt. Ltd. and others v. State of Punjab and others [along with connected matters]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 14
The Punjab & Haryana High Court quashed an FIR lodged under Prevention of Corruption Act (PC Act) against Gulmohar Township India Pvt Ltd and its director for allegedly fraudulently bifurcating a land into smaller plots without following due process of law and causing huge loss to State exchequer.
The Court noted that the complaint was lodged by "Navjot Singh-congressman" whose identity is unknown and without verification the complaint was sent to the Deputy Superintendent of Police.
Title: Nabhdeep Bansal v. State of Punjab and Anr [with other connected matters]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 15
The Punjab and Haryana High Court refused to answer a reference question placed before it, observing that that the single judge prima facie breached the "norm of propriety governing judicial functionings" and called itself as "coram non judice".
Title: Manmeet Kaur v. The State of UT Chandigarh
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 16
The Punjab & Haryana High Court quashed an FIR lodged against a woman–an international civil servant with the United Nations–who traveled from South Africa to India, under Sections 269 IPC and Section 51 of Disaster Management Act for allegedly spreading COVID-19 infection during the outbreak in 2021.
Title: Soni Kumar v. State of Punjab
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 17
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has said that an FIR under Section 174-A IPC (non-appearance of a person in response to a court summons or warrant of arrest) does not get quashed merely because the main case is quashed or the parties have entered into compromise, however the same will be a relevant factor to consider in the quashing plea.
Title: AMANDEEP KAMBOJ @ AMAN v. STATE OF PUNJAB
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 18
The Punjab and Haryana High Court granted bail to conman Aman Skoda accused of defrauding by taking hefty sum of money in exchange of providing government job in Punjab.
Amandeep Kamboj, alias Aman Skoda, was declared proclaimed offender in other cases and was absconding for 2 years and allegedly involved in 48 FIRs. He was arrested in Varanasi in March, 2024 by Punjab Police.
Title: Mahinder Ram v. Commandant General, Punjab Home Guards and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 19
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has directed the authorities to grant subsistence allowance to a home guard who worked continuously for 27 years, observing that denying the same on the ground that he was not permanent or regular employee would be violative of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution.
Title: LSE Securities Ltd v. Jaswinder Singh Kapoor
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 20
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has made it clear that a company cannot refuse to produce a summoned document by seeking protection of Article 20(3) of the constitution, without satisfying its ingredients.
Title: Rajpal v. State of Punjab
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 21
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has said that "non-cooperation in investigation” must be interpreted with precision and cannot be equated with the failure of the accused to disclose information about his alleged accomplices or for facilitating the recovery of bribe money.
Title: Brindco Sale Pvt Ltd. v. State of Punjab
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 22
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has set aside the order rejecting a liquor license (L-1), observing that if a director is involved in a criminal case then it would not mean that the company is also involved.
Title: Prem Kumar v. Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh and another
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 23
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has directed to reinstate an additional and sessions judge with consequential benefit, who was dispensed from service during the probation period on account of "doubtful integrity" .
Title: Dabir Singh v State of Haryana
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 24
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has refused to grant anticipatory bail to a man accused of taking 10 crore with other co-accused for securing the post of Lieutenant Governor in Andaman and Nicobar, observing that granting relief when there is prima facie sufficient evidence would send a "very negative message" to the public.
Gurpreet Singh v. State of Punjab
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 25
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has refused to grant anticipatory bail to a man accused in a drugs case seeking relief on the ground that the co-accused has been granted regular bail, observing that the petitioner wilfully evaded his arrest for more than 2 years.
Title: Vuenow Infotech Pvt. Ltd. v. Directorate of Enforcement, Jalandhar Zonal Office, Punjab and Another
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 26
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has refused to de-freeze bank account of Vuenow Infotech Pvt. Ltd, a company allegedly involved in the "Cloud Particle Scam".
Vuenow Infotech is accused of dishonestly inducing large number of investors to invest in cloud particles or data center assets by selling them non- existent and insubstantial particles and have, therefore, cheated and breached the trust of various investors.
Title: JOGINDER SINGH v. STATE OF PUNJAB
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 27
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has said that accused persons who are not present at the crime scene should be held equally accountable and should not be afforded any leniency under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS Act).
Title: Sarwan Singh v. Jagmohan Singh
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 28
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has said that the Court Fees (Punjab Second Amendment) Act, 2009, will be applicable on appeals filed in the High Court if the suit from which an appeal has arrived was instituted in Punjab, regardless of the fact that the High Court is located in UT Chandigarh.
Title: SUKHPREET SINGH DHALIWAL @ BUDHA v. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 29
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has refused to grant immunity under the Extradition Act, 1962 to an alleged “notorious gangster” Sukhpreet Singh Dhaliwal (Budda) finding that he was arrested at IGI airport (New Delhi) after Armenia authorities had released him.
Title: Dr. Sushank v. Union of India and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 30
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has directed the National Medical Commission to ensure creation of Appellate Medical Body to address disputes related to disability certificates for medical admissions.
Title: Neeraj Saluja v. Directorate of Enforcement
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 31
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has granted bail to the former director of SEL Textiles Limited Neeraj Saluja in a money laundering case, accused of diverting loan amount for purposes other than what it was sanctioned for.
Title: Subhash Chand v. Financial Commissioner, Haryana and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 32
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has held that the post of Lambardar is a civil post and his dismissal or removal attracts the provisions of Article 311 of the Constitution.
Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice Kirti Singh said that a Lambardar who occupies a civil post, thus cannot claim eligibility for his being appointed against some other civil post.
TITLE: PUNEET AGGARWAL V/S PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AND ANOTHER
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 33
The Punjab & Haryana High Court on Thursday (January 23) issued notice on a plea challenging the marks allotted to a candidate in mains examination of Haryana Superior Judiciary, 2023.
While issuing notice on the plea, a bench of Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sumeet Goel orally remarked, "Under Judicial Review we are entering into an area which is not our domain."
Title: Smt Bhagrathi v. State Of Haryana and ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 34
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has issued slew of directions for conducting the no-confidence against Chairman of Faridabad block samiti on January 24.
Suspecting horse-trading the plea filed by the Chairman challenged the notice to postpone the No-Confidence Motion meeting from January 13 to January 24.
Title: STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER v. V N GROVER AND OTHERS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 35
The Punjab & Haryana High Court took a stern stand on Haryana Government's action to only give 1 Rupee hike in pay scale of Executive Engineer following High Court's direction to revise the salary, observing that the revised salary is "non-functional" and "patently illegal."
Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma and Justice Meenakshi I. Mehta said, "We find that the action of the State authorities is committing mockery of the Court's orders, and certain officers who pass such orders deserve to be hauled up. We deprecate the practice adopted by the officers in making lip service to the Court's orders."
Title: Narender Kumar Malhotra v. Union of India and another
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 36
The Punjab & Haryana High Court dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed seeking declaration to make celebration of festival of “Karwa Chauth” compulsory by women irrespective of their status of being widows, separated, divorcees and the women in live-in relation.
Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sumeet Goel while dismissing the plea imposed a token cost of Rs.1000.
Title: UNION OF INDIA v. JC 428517 EX SUBEDAR ANOKH SINGH AND ANOTHER
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 37
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has taken a stern stand on the failure of the Union Government to grant disability pension to a retired Armed Forces Officer following the Supreme Court's directions. In an order passed on January 23, a bench of Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma and Justice Meenakshi I. Mehta said, "In another three days, we are going to celebrate the 76th Republic Day, and the entire celebrations of Independence and Republic Day are basically on account of our Army Forces performing strenuous duties at the borders and even challenging the counter-terrorism. The Union of India and its authorities are therefore required to be alive to their situations."
Breach Of Lok Adalat Order Will Not Amount To Contempt Of Court: Punjab & Haryana High Court
Title: Arun Kumar Gupta and others v. M/s Karnal Motors Pvt. Ltd
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 38
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has said that Lok Adalat is not a Court under the Contempt of Courts Act and breach of its order will not amount to contempt of court.
Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice Kirti Singh allowed an appeal against a contempt notice issued for violating an undertaking given before the Lok Adalat.
Title: Amar Singh v. State of Punjab & Ors
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 39
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has directed to reinstate a policeman expelled from service for being accused in robbery case even after being acquitted in the matter.
Justice Jagmohan Bansal noted that the, “police authorities dismiss an officer as soon as FIR is registered whereas mandate of Rule 16.2 and 16.3 is to dismiss from service after conviction. The officer may be suspended or assigned non sensitive posting, however, department should not take harsh action of dismissal from service in every case where an FIR has been registered. In an exceptional case, action of dismissal at the first instance may be taken but it should not be practice.”
Title: SAURABH MADAAN MITHU v. STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 40
The Punjab & Haryana High Court today directed the video recording of proceedings to be conducted for electing the mayor of Amritsar Municipal Corporation.
In a plea filed by a Congress Councillor it was alleged that the houses of some of the Councillors, who are to participate in the meeting, were being raided by the Police authorities to harass them and prevent their participation in the aforesaid meeting for electing the Mayor.
Title: M/S BRAHMA MAINTENANCE PVT.LTD. v. THE CONSUMER GRIEVANCES REDRESSAL FORUM (UHBVN) AND OTHER
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 41
The Punjab & Haryana High Court dismissed a firm's plea which had challenged an order of the Consumer Grievances Redressal Forum (UHBVN) formulated under the regulations of the Haryana Electricity Regulatory Commission (HERC) which had directed the former to provide electricity bill to the consumers showing clearly the energy consumed and tariff applicable following the regulations.
Title: Association of NCTE approved Colleges Trust v. State of Haryana and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 42
The Punjab & Haryana High Court imposed a cost of Rs 4 lakh on the Association of Colleges which has been approved by the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) for filing a frivolous petition challenging regular inspection carried out by the University under which colleges are affiliated.
Title: Lakshay Attri v. Chandigarh Administration and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 43
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has dismissed a PIL seeking directions to Chandigarh UT Administration to take immediate remedial steps to restore a Football Stadium, in Sector-17 Chandigarh in conformity with international standards, observing that the court cannot step into the administration's shoes and start running it.
Title: Faisal Ali v. UOI & Ors
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 44
The Punjab & Haryana High Court on Friday has disposed of a plea seeking a ban on the release of a movie based on the Delhi riots 2020.
The Court took note of the Union Government's submission that the producer of the movie 'Delhi-2020' has not yet applied for the certificate before the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC).
Title: Sikandar Singh v. Directorate of Enforcement
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 45
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has granted bail to a director of a company accused under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) for fabricating bank guarantees as well as cheating 1500 prospective home buyers.
Title: Samarveer Singh v. State of Punjab and others
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 46
The Punjab & Haryana High Court quashed an order of a Punjab State University whereby admission granted to a medical student under the freedom fighter quota was cancelled despite clear reservation criteria given under the prospectus.
Case Title: Dilbagh Singh v. State of Punjab
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 47
Observing that visa fraud if left unchecked could "tarnish the nation's reputation on a global scale and undermine the integrity and legality of immigration systems, where one can already feel the headwinds," the Punjab & Haryana High Court said that when such a case is registered the concerned agency must verify the claim and the complainant's credentials.
Title: Suresh Kumar v. State of Haryana and others
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 48
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has imposed a cost of Rs. 25,000 on a litigant who filed a "contemptuous" plea seeking the filing of an FIR against judicial officers and lawyers allegedly for grabbing a public property.
Title: Samarveer Singh v. State of Punjab and others
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 49
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has said that in discharging its role as a litigant, the State must adopt a balanced and judicious approach, resisting the temptation to oppose the claims of citizens indiscriminately.
Title: CBI v. State of Haryana along with connected matter.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 50
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has set aside an order refusing to grant sanction to prosecute the four members of the Special Investigation Team (SIT) constituted by the Commissioner of Police, accused of framing a school bus conductor in the Gurugram school student murder case.
Title: Sanjeev Kumar v. State of Haryana and others
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 51
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has said that the state is duty-bound to consider the regularisation of employees who have been working for 10 years in accordance with the Supreme Court's directive in Secretary, State of Karnataka vs. Umadevi.
Title: United India Insurance Co. Ltd v. Gurjinder Kaur and others [along with other petitions]
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 52
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has made it clear that negligence of the driver of the offending vehicle need not be proved under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicle Act, to claim compensation.
Title: Pawan Kharbanda v. State of Punjab and another
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 53
The Punjab & Haryana High Court issued a slew of guidelines to magistrates on consideration of cancellation reports and applications to lodge FIRs under section 156(3) of CrPC. (Section 175(3) of BNSS), observing the variations in the manner, in which Magistrates are dealing it.
Title: Pawan Kharbanda v. State of Punjab and another
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 54
The Punjab & Haryana has observed that Section 175(3) of BNSS has introduced additional safeguards ensuring that before directing the registration of an FIR, the Magistrate is required to conduct such inquiry as deemed necessary and consider the submissions made by the police officer.
Title: Jaibuna @ Jai Bhuna v. State of Haryana
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 55
The Punjab & Haryana High Court rejected bail of a woman accused of blackmailing a 73-year-old doctor to make viral his obscene videos and extorting Rs 1.34 crore from him.
Title: Jaiveer Yadav and others v. State of Haryana
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 56
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has quashed the FIR and summoning orders under the Prevention of Corruption Act against selected candidates in Haryana Civil Services (HCS) 2004, accused of being involved in corruption case against the Chairman and Members of the HPSC in selections from the year 2001 to 2004.
Title: Sudhir Jiwan v. High Court of Punjab & Haryana and another
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 57
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has refused to drop disciplinary proceedings initiated against a judicial officer, a member Superior Judicial Services accused of granting excessive compensation in a road accident case based on "extraneous consideration."
Title: Pritpal Singh Grewal v. Gurlal Singh Grewal
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 58
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has made it clear that the Company Law Board is a court subordinate to the High Court, and contempt proceedings in violation of its order could be initiated by an aggrieved party without requiring a reference from it.
Title: Subhash Chander Dutt v. State of Haryana
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 59
Following the demise of an undertrial awaiting medical bail, the Punjab and Haryana High Court flagged the failure of Haryana government who made "misleading submissions" before the Court.
Title: Subhash Chander Dutt v. State of Haryana
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 60
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has said that "the State is obligated to ensure that only competent and ethical professionals are entrusted with the responsibility of representing the State before the Court."
Title: MOHAN LAL v. UT OF CHANDIGARH AND ORS
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 61
Observing that Chandigarh Small Flats Scheme, 2006, under which residents of Jhuggis (slums) were to be allotted one-room flats aims to provide shelter to jhuggi dwellers, the Punjab & Haryana High Court said a detailed enquiry is required to be conducted before concluding that the applicant is not a resident.
Title: Heena Shehrawat v. State of Haryana and others
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has directed the issuance of an appointment letter to a civil judge candidate who was disqualified after qualifying the interview due to being short of 2.5 marks in the written exam, as an answer was not checked.
Title: RENU SHARMA AND ORS v. HARYANA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 62
The Punjab & Haryana High Court allowed plea of candidates challenging their disqualification in Haryana Public Service Commission (HPSC) due to not filing booklet series in the OMR sheet, observing that "securing a public employment is a dream for a common person and the failure to compete in the same solely due to certain inadvertent omissions would crush the entire career prospects of a candidate, more so, it is only occasionally that advertisements for such public employment are issued."
Title: RAMAN @ SONU v. STATE OF PUNJAB
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 63
The Punjab & Haryana High Court refused to grant bail to a man accused of writing provocative slogans supporting the Khalistani movement on walls and circulating inflammatory videos on social media. Justice Manjari Nehru Kaul said, "Prima facie the allegations against the petitioner are not only serious but strike at the core of national integrity and public security. The petitioner is accused of orchestrating activities aimed at reviving the Khalistani movement which poses significant threats to the stability of the State of Punjab and the nation as a whole."
Title: Aaditya Sharma v. State of Punjab
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 64
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has said that in cases involving offences under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS Act), where sentence is of ten years, the accused should generally be not released on bail.
Justice Manisha Batra said, "It has been seen that the denial of bail has prevented the accused from fleeing from the criminal justice and protected the society by preventing that additional criminal activity. It is believed that the graver the crime the graver is the chances of absconding. Even otherwise, in NDPS cases, where the sentence is of ten years, the accused should generally be not released on bail as in such like cases, negation of bail is the rule and its grant is an exception."
Title: Amandeep Singh v. Preet Industries and Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 65
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has expressed shock at the actions of a judicial officer who failed to call for the lower court record of a case he was hearing on appeal for five years. The Court noted that the judge continued passing routine orders for five years without taking any effective steps to summon the case record from the Court situated in the same district. Justice N.S Shekhawat noted,
"Shockingly, the lower Court record was not received by the Appellate Court for a period of more than five years from a local court itself. It is really painful to notice that the Presiding Officers of the Appellate Court had passed routine orders and did not bother to take any effective steps for summoning the lower Court record."
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 66
Finding that the convict was mentally unsound at the time of incident, the Punjab & Haryana High Court acquitted a man convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment for the murdering his three-year-old daughter. The Court allowed the defence under Section 84 IPC to the convict since mens rea was absent due to the accused's prolonged mental illness and he was incapable of understanding the nature and consequences of his actions at the time of the offence.
Service Can't Be Terminated During Maternity Leave: Punjab & Haryana High Court
Ravisan and others v. State of Punjab and others [along with other pleas]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 67
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has said that the service of an employee who is on maternity leave can't be terminated during the period of leave. Justice Harsimran Singh Sethi said, "once an employee was on maternity leave, the said period of maternity leave could not have been curtailed so as to terminate the service of an employee and the services of the employee could have been dispensed with upon her joining after availing the benefit of maternity leave."
Title: Kumar Pal and others v. Union of India and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 68
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has said that Class III and Class IV ad-hoc employees working in the Sessions Court cannot be replaced and directed the authorities to take appropriate steps to regularise them. Justice Harsimran Singh Sethi said, "It is directed that the petitioners should be allowed to continue in service till the work of the post in question exist subject to satisfactory work and conduct of the employees. Further, such employees including the petitioners will not be replaced by another set of employees on the same terms and conditions and they will be allowed to continue on the post on the terms and conditions as it exists today."
Title: YATENDER PAL v. STATE OF HARYANA
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 69
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that self-incriminatory statement given by an accused while being subjected to lie-detector test cannot be used against him as a "material evidence". A division bench of Justice Gurvinder Singh Gill and Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi clarified that "conducting of lie a detector test is merely an aid in investigation in case the accused discloses any such relevant information."
Title: Punjab & Sind Bank and another v. Surinder Kumar Verma
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 70
The Punjab & Haryana High Court upheld cost of Rs.50,000 imposed on Punjab & Sind Bank over failure to file reply for 17 years in a plea filed by a retired employee seeking release of gratuity. The bank had moved an appeal against the order of a single judge who had expressed "shock" to find that the plea was pending since 2005 because the bank failed to file reply for 17 years. Consequently, a cost of Rs.50,000 was imposed on the Bank for delaying the plea by the single judge.
Prospective Home Buyers Can Also Approach RERA For Remedies: Punjab & Haryana High Court
Title: M/S RAMPRASTHA DEVELOPERS PVT LTD AND ORS v. STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 71
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has made it clear that home buyers who have deposited certain amount and are prospective allottees can also filed complaint in Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) for redressal of grievances. The Court rejected the contention of a Real Estate Company that the complainants are not home buyers or allottees because the project is not in existence and they only tendered money for prospective projects, hence no cause of action will arise.
Accused Fled To America To Evade Trial, Punjab & Haryana High Court Imposes Cost In US Dollars
Title: AVTAR SINGH PANNU v. STATE OF PUNJAB
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 72
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has imposed a cost of $10,000 US dollar cost on an accused, who fled to America after obtaining bail in 2004 so as to evade trial in a fraud case for "almost 20 years." Justice Sandeep Moudgil said, "There is no denial to the fact that due to petitioner's act, delay has occurred in trial proceedings and has caused prejudice to the other side and to compensate the delay which is caused by the petitioner alone, he is directed to deposit costs of US $10,000 with the Punjab and Haryana High Court Bar Clerks Association and a receipt of the same be produced before the trial Court and only in that eventuality, application of the petitioner for seeking bail be considered and decided on the same day."
High Court Orders Action Against 4,000 Illegal Constructions In Gurugram's DLF City
Title: DLF CITY RESIDENTS WELFARE ASSOCIATION AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF HARYNA AND OTHERS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 73
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has issued a writ of mandamus to the Haryana state authorities, asking them to take “prompt action” against over 4,000 unauthorized constructions in Gurugram's DLF City, within two months. The Court took note of local administration's involvement in allowing “land mafias” to construct unauthorised buildings which are comping up at “alarming rate.”
Title: Union of India and another v. Sukhpreet Kaur and another
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 74
The Punjab & Haryana High Court on Thursday observed that the adoption of a Hindu child in Hindu family under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act can be done even without registered deed. The case pertains to compassionate appointment in Railways, of an adoptive daughter whose appointment was denied because in Class 10th certificate names of her biological parents were reflected instead of adoptive one.
Title: Gagandeep @ Monti v. Sukhbir Singh and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 75
Observing that the judicial system needs self-assessment as it was "responsible" for a delay of 24 years to decide "just compensation" to a road accident victim suffering pelvic fracture urethral injury, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has awarded the claimant Rs.1.3 Crores in compensation. The Court enhanced the compensation from Rs.7 lakhs awarded by the Tribunal to Rs.1.3 Crores to the victim who was permanently disabled in a road accident.
Title: MANJINDERSINGH @MANJINDERMAKHA VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 76
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has granted anticipatory bail to the author of a book based on deceased Punjabi singer Sidhu Moosewala's life account, in a defamation case. A complaint was filed by Moosewala's father against the author–Manjinder Singh who wrote the book 'The Real Reason Why Legend Died' under sections 451, 406(criminal breach of trust), and 380(theft) of the Indian Penal Code, along with Section 356(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), alleging that it contains defamatory material against singer's family.
Title: Naveen and others v. State of Haryana and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 77
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has made it clear that the Haryana Staff Service Commission (HSSC) cannot ask for latest Backward Class (BC) certificate at the second stage of selection process when the certificate is filed at the time of Common Eligibility Test (CET). Justice Jagmohan Bansal said, "In the absence of particular date in the rules or advertisement, last date prescribed for filing application for the advertised post is cut-off date. In the instant case, cut-off date for limited purpose i.e. to upload documents, was last date notified for filing application. The said date had no bearing with the date of BC certificate."
Title: Kanwar Pahul Singh v UOI
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 78
The Punjab & Haryana High Court today directed the State authorities to decide representation within a month on a plea filed seeking action against fake travel agents and for establishing an immigration check post in Punjab to prevent illegal immigration from Punjab to United States of America via "donkey route” (illegal means). I
Title: Bhola @ Ram Dass v. State of Haryana
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 79
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has made it clear that if an appellant dies during the pendency of the appeal and the fine imposed on him by the trial court has been stayed or if the entire fine amount has been deposited with the Court before death, then the appeal will be abated.
Title: DINESH KUMAR & ORS VS STATE OF HARYANA & ORS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 80
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has directed the Uttar Pradesh (UP) Government to release funds for erecting boundary pillars at the disputed sites on the UP-Haryana border. Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice Vikas Suri said, "Financial grants in the said regard be forthwith released, inasmuch as, within a period of three weeks from today, so that the work of erection of boundary pillars both within the States of Haryana and Uttar Pradesh becomes completed within a further period of four weeks."
Title: Central Bureau of Investigation v. Ravinder Singh @ Ravinder Singh Bhasin and others Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 81
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has allowed CBI to recall or examine 12 witnesses in the infamous cash at judge's door scam case. In 2008, a peon of then sitting judge of Punjab & Haryana Court Justice Nirmaljit Kaur filed a complaint that a bag of Rs.15 lakh cash was delivered at Justice Kaur's Court by a clerk who was later apprehended after the judge asked to catch him. The case was transferred to CBI and according to prosecution, the bag was meant to be delivered to Justice Nirmal Yadav's residence.
Title: Rajender Singh v. State Of Haryana
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 82
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has said that non- signing of the deposition of the witnesses, by a Magistrate in a warrant case under Section 275 CrPC ( Section 310 BNSS) would be fatal to the case of the prosecution. Justice Harpreet Singh Brar said, "A bare perusal of the (Section 275(4) CrPC) provision indicates that any evidence taken by the jurisdictional Magistrate, in written form, shall be signed by him for it to be considered as evidence and form a part of the record of the jurisdictional Court."
Title: ISHWAR SINGH AND OTHERS. v. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 83
The Punjab & Haryana High Court directed the Surveyor General of India to examine the changing patterns of Yamuna with the help of revenue agency of Haryana and Uttar Pradesh (UP) in order to study its impact on territories of both the states to resolve land dispute.
Title: Balvir Singh @ Dhira v. State of Punjab & others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 84
The Punjab & Haryana High Court pulled up the authorities for rejecting parole of a man convicted under the NDPS Act "merely on assumptions" that the convict may smuggle drugs during elections which may affect public order. The convict had moved the parole application at the time of the general election of 2024 and the same was rejected by Deputy Commissioner-cum-District Magistrate, Bathinda on the grounds that the convict may smuggle drugs during elections and that the parole is prohibited to the NDPS convicts during elections.
Title: Deepak and others v. State of Haryana and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 85
The Punjab & Haryana High Court said that Haryana Staff Selection Commission (HSSC) cannot come out with a priority list at the later stage of selection of candidates when the same was not advertised in the notification. A notification was issued by HSSC for the post of Group C & D and passing of CET exam was the prerequisite to apply for the post. At the stage of mains, HSSC prepared a priority list stating that In the Ex-Serviceman category, disabled Ex-Serviceman will be given priority.
Title: Jasmeen Kaur v. State of Punjab and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 86
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has allowed a student to complete his course who was admitted to a college without the mandatory qualification of having a Hindi subject in Class X, observing that she already completed 1.5 years out of 2 years of the course and he did not commit any fraud. Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sumeet Goel said, "The purpose of legal norms is to uphold fairness, not to be applied mechanically to defeat substantial justice. Where a party, albeit initially ineligible, has acted in good faith and without any fraudulent intent, and where no overriding public interest is adversely affected, equity demands that the individual should not be subjected to disproportionate hardship solely on the basis of a technical defect at the inception."
Titile: Ravinder v. State of Haryana
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 87
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has made it clear that the law laid down in the Pankaj Bansal case will be applicable prospectively which is after October 03, 2023, the date on which the judgment in Pankaj Bansal was pronounced. In a landmark judgment in the case Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India, the Supreme Court held that the Directorate of Enforcement must furnish the reasons for arrest to the accused in writing.
Title: XXX v. XXX Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 88
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has granted divorce on ground of "cruelty" under the Hindu Marriage Act to a man whose wife was convicted for murdering their children. Justice Sudhir Singh and Justice Harsh Bunger said, "the conviction of the respondent and sentence of life imprisonment under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for murder has caused mental pain, agony and apprehension in the mind of the appellant that it is not safe to live with the respondent and it clearly amounts to “cruelty”.
Title: Atanu Chaudhary v. State of Punjab
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 89
The Punjab & Haryana High Court refused to grant anticipatory bail to a man allegedly involved in case of posing as officers of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and staging a fake virtual courtroom, with one of them impersonating former CJI DY Chandrachud.
Justice Mahabir Singh Sindhu noted that, “instances of cyber-fraud are increasing day by day and according to the Data maintained by Reserve Bank of India, an amount of Rs.3207 crore was lost due to 582000 cases of cyber-fraud between F.Y 2020 to F.Y. 2024. Also noteworthy that during F.Y. 2023 to F.Y. 2024, an amount of Rs.2054 Crore has been lost on account of cyber-frauds in our country.”
TITLE: Rahul Rajput v. Food Corporation of India
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 90
The Punjab & Haryana High Court scrapped the tender floated by the Food Corporation of India (FCI) with the direction to issue fresh notification so that public amenities do not suffer.
Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice Vikas Suri said, "This Court is constrained to after accepting the writ petition, to pass a mandamus upon the respondent to scrap the subject tender, thus, for ensuring better competition for all concerned and also for receiving better bids."
Title: VIJAY KUMAR VS STATE OF PUNJAB
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 91
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has set aside the confiscation order of a vehicle allegedly involved in a case under the NDPS Act, observing that the same was passed without following the procedure under Section 63 of the Act. The Court set aside the confiscation order of alleged offending vehicle was passed along with the order of sentence wherein the owner of the vehicle was held guilty.
Title: Maharishi Markandeshwar Developers Private Ltd v.State of Haryana and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 92
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has directed the Haryana Government to prepare a scientific disaster management plan for the residential areas situated at the river banks, observing that the Court is under a "constitutional duty to ensure the safety concerns." Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice Vikas Suri said, "A team of experts becoming deployed to prepare a scientific disaster management plan, thus for the benefit of all the inhabitants of the thickly inhabited localities, which exist on the banks of all the rivers flowing within the State of Haryana."
Title: Pawan Kumar v. State of Haryana and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 93
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has said that the State cannot indulge in cherry picking and only provide the concession of premature release to a select few out of the pool of similarly situated convicts and such approach is "highly inequities."
Justice Harpreet Sing Brar said, "People from all walks of life hold the idea of liberty close to their heart and have historically done everything in their power to not part from it. For a convict serving a life sentence, liberty has to be the most precious of possessions. It should not be assumed that all convicts when released will unleash revenge onto their prosecutors. The convict's conduct in jail, state of mind, gravity of the offence, social background and behaviour while on parole must be duly considered before deciding upon the question of his premature release."
Title: Pritpal Singh v. State of Punjab and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 94
Calling it an "exceptional situation", the Punjab & Haryana High Court upheld a trial court order, recalling its bail cancellation order passed on the basis of false statement that the accused failed to join investigation as the particular day was a public holiday.
Title: Rajpal & Ors. v. District Bar Association Hisar & Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 95
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has asked the petitioners challenging the resolution passed by the General Body of the District Bar Association Hisar resolving that five days week be observed as working days and all Saturdays as no work day, to approach the Bar Council of Punjab & Haryana. Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Harmeet Singh Grewal said, "There is an inhouse remedy of preferring representation/dispute before the Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana, which can be very well availed by the petitioners."
Title: LORD SHIVA THE DEITY PRACHIN SHIV MANDIR v. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 96
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has directed to open the sealed main entrance of a Prachin Shiv Temple on account of Maha Shivratri, to avoid any incident of stampede on the occasion and directed the supervision of Chandigarh Police. The Court had earlier directed that the Military force would supervise the entire crowd, however, the order was today modified and the Court asked DSP Chandigarh to provide the manpower.
Title: Rajinder Pal Singh Dhaliwal v. General Public and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 97
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has made it clear that mere admission of signatures on a paper does not amount to admission of Will; in order to prove that the Will was executed by the testator, the propounder has to lead evidence of unimpeachable character."
Justice Pankaj Jain said, "Mere admission of signatures on a paper does not amount to admission of Will... Will in law is a unique document which speaks after the death of testator. The judicial conscience needs to be satisfied that testator signed the WILL being aware of its contents. In order to prove that the Will was in fact executed by the testator, the propounder has to lead evidence of unimpeachable character."
Title: Daulat Ram Bhatti v. State of Punjab [along with connected matters]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 98
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has made it clear that the Punjab Government's Greater Mohali Area Development Authority (GMADA) could not unilaterally alter contractual terms or impose extra charges not specified in the original allotment scheme.
Title: Puneet Sharma and others v. Union Territory, Chandigarh and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 99
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has put a stay on the operation of the cancellation order of street vendor's licenses to run their businesses on the streets of Chandigarh till they approach the appellate authority and the plea is decided.
The Street vendors had challenged the cancellation order on the ground that they were arbitrarily shifted to remote areas, affecting their livelihood and in violation of the Chandigarh Street Vendors Rules, 2015.
Title: Gurprabh Singh @ Prince v. State of Punjab
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 100
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has said that the bar on granting bail in case of commercial quantity under Section 37 of the NDPS Act can be relaxed when the alleged recovered contraband is "marginally above" the commercial quantity.
Title: COMPUTER TEACHERS WELFARE SOCIETY(REGD) Vs STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 101
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has made it clear that the computer teachers recruited under the Punjab Information and Technology Education Society (PICTES) are required to be governed by the Punjab Civil Service (PCS) Rules.
Title: ABCD v. State of Haryana
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 102
"When a person has been exonerated by the Court of his guilt, the remnants of such charge should not be allowed to haunt any such person", said the Punjab & Haryana High Court while directing its Registry to redact the name of a man who was accused in a FIR, which was later quashed. The petitioner stated that he is a respectable man and despite clearing the interviews for employment in multinational companies, he didn't receive the offer letter because his name was available on e-courts portal as an accused in a criminal case.
Title: Navneet Chauhan and others v. State of Haryana and another
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 103
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has set aside charges framed under the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, observing that the offence cannot be attracted merely on the ground that the victim belongs to the SC/ST community without intention to humiliate him due to his caste.
Title: ARJUN SINGH AND OTHERS v. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 104
The Punjab & Haryana High Court dismissed the plea challenging the screening test question paper for the post of Post Graduate Teacher (PGT) (Chemistry) and its final answer key published in October 2024 noting that the expert committee has already been formed and Court cannot sit over it, unless there is an allegation of malice.
Title: Gaurav Sorot v. State of Haryana and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 105
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has made it clear that extension lecturer holding M.Phil degree who have not qualified UGC NET has no right to continue in service and is required to be relieved from service.
Title: Navdeep Singh and another v. State of Punjab and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 106
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has dismissed the plea of two judiciary candidates, whose selection was cancelled in 2002 for alleged involvement in recruitment scam, seeking appointment. Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sumeet Goel cited delay on part of the candidate in approaching the Court, after they were acquitted in the corruption case in 2016.
Title: Pawan Kumar v. Inspector (Preventive), Central Goods and Services Tax
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 107
Observing that the case shows "distressing picture of the criminal justice system's failure", the Punjab & Haryana High Court has set aside condition to pay Rs.1.10 crore in bail bond for granting default bail to an accused in Tax Fraud case.
The Court noted that the accused has been in custody for the past 4 years, 01 month and 20 days, while the maximum sentence for the alleged offences is 5 years.
Title: JAGMAL SINGH JATAIN v. DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE, BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 108
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has made it clear that Bar Council Of India (BCI) cannot entertain appeal from interim order of the State Bar Council's disciplinary committee when the probe is pending and no punishment is imposed.
Title: XXX v. XXXX
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 109
The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently upheld the mother's custody of a 10 years old girl child, rejecting the father's contention that he is the rightful guardian of the child as he is building a financial corpus for the child's future.
Single judge Justice Archana Puri remarked, "So far as, the financial security is concerned, it is good that father is doing so to secure the future of the child, but however, it is the fatherly duty. Now, at this age of the child, it is not going to have impact on the personality 'built-up' of the child. There are various other factors, which are more important for the age group of 9-10 years, which carry more weight, than the creating of financial security."
Title: M/S SIEL INDUSTRIAL ESTATE LTD v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 110
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has declared Punjab Government's decision to “resume” ownership rights in ongoing projects in Rajpura's Industrial Estate as "inoperative."
Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice Vikas Suri said, "there is a necessity of passing a fresh speaking decision, in accordance with law, as such both the interest of justice and equity demands, that the presently impugned notification(s), at this stage, be declared to be completely inoperative."
Case Title: Amritpal Singh v. UNION OF INDIA
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 112
The Union Government informed the Punjab and Haryana High Court that MP Amritpal Singh has been granted leave of 54 days from attending sessions of the Parliament.
The development is significant in light of Article 101(4) which empowers the House to declare the seat of an MP vacant if (s)he is absent from all meetings of the House for a period of sixty days, without permission of the House.
Title: SUNIL KUMAR AND OTHERS v. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 113
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has said that the mortgagee has a right to sell the mortgage property in a public auction if the borrower fails to pay the stipulated instalments.
Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice Vikas Suri said, "there is an inherent right in the mortgagee to, on the failure of liquidation of the relevant installments by the borrower, thus to subject the subject plot to sale through public auction."
Title: Jugjit Kaur v. Rajwinder Singh
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 114
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has said that, to maintain uniformity in imposing fines in cheque bounce cases under the Negotiable Instruments Act (NI Act), the fine should be equivalent to the amount of the cheque, plus at least 6% interest per annum from the date of the cheque until the date of the judgment of conviction."
PXXXX v. State Of Punjab
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 115
The Punjab & Haryana High Court refused to grant pre-arrest bail to a man who was accused of parading five people including minor girls in the market with a placard, "I am a thief, I confess my guilt" written on it.
Title: Kuldeep Singh alias Keepa v. State of Punjab
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 116
In a significant development, the Punjab & Haryana High Court has said that case involving small quantity under the NDPS Act is "Bailable" by operation of BNSS and accused will be entitled for bail without filing bail application.
The case pertains to the alleged recovery of 1 gram of heroin. The petitioner was arrayed as an accused based on a disclosure statement. Following a chance recovery, the police seized 1 gram of heroin from the possession of the co-accused. He confessed before the Police officer that he used to purchase drugs from the petitioner Kuldeep, and even the heroin recovered was purchased from him.
Title: RAM BHAJ & OTHERS v. STATE OF HARYANA
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 117
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has altered a 100 year old man's murder conviction to culpable homicide not amounting to murder, noting that he delivered a single blow with his lathi, which is not a weapon and is typically carried by elderly persons in villages.
Title: Talwinder Singh & anr v. State of Punjab
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 118
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has made it clear that unless the specific acts constituting both abetment and cruelty are explicitly set out in the charge under Section 306 IPC, a conviction under Section 498-A cannot be sustained in the absence of a separate charge of any specific charge for such offence.
RTI Act Doesn't Give Right To Seek Information With Motive To Harass: Punjab & Haryana High Court
Title: Punjab State Federation of Co-operative Sugar Mills Ltd. v. The State Information Commission, Punjab and another
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 119
The Punjab & Haryana High has said that the Right to Information Act (RTI Act) does not give right to anyone to seek information with a motive which amounts to harassing the employees of the Department.
In the present case, the information of the complete record of the Department was sought from the Cooperative Society by a lawyer.
Title: Rajesh Gupta v. Punjab and Haryana High Court and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 120
The Punjab and Haryana High Court today said that that minimum marks prescribed for qualifying district judiciary exam is "is permissible for adjudging the qualities and capacities of the candidate seeking an appointment to judiciary."
The candidates in the Haryana District judiciary exam were required to secure at least 50% i.e 500 marks out of the 1000 aggregate marks in the written test and viva voce.
Title: SOHAN LAL AND OTHERS v. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 121
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has declared Sections 3G and 3J of the National Highways Act as unconstitutional for being violative of Article 14.
Court said that the provisions unfairly denied benefits to land losers available under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.
Title: Manish Kumar and others v. State of Haryana and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 122
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has said that the construction of the hospital cannot be challenged on the grounds that it has increased traffic influx in the area, especially when multi-level parking is planned by the State authority. Removing the hospital in this case would be violation of the fundamental right to trade and practice profession under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India.
Title: B.B. Gupta v. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Union Territory, Chandigarh and another
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 123
The Punjab & Haryana High Court made it clear that resignation of an employee cannot be accepted retrospectively if the resignation is withdrawn before the acceptance.
Justice Harsimran Singh Sethi said, "Once, a resignation which is sought to be accepted had already been withdrawn by the petitioner, there was no jurisdiction with the authority concerned to accept the same with retrospective effect so as to over come the withdrawal of the resignation by the employee concerned."
TITLE: AMIT KUMAR V. STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 124
The Punjab & Haryana High Court dismissed the plea seeking appointment in Haryana Police alleging that he was awarded lesser marks in the interview to favour relatives of politicians in a recruitment exam conducted in 2008. Justice Jagmohan Bansal said, "The petitioners, at present, are more than 40 years. Physical/mental fitness is of paramount consideration in the Police Force. The petitioners cannot be expected of having fitness as postulated for an Inspector of Police at the time of initial appointment."
Title: HARSIMRAN KAUR v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 125
The Punjab & Haryana High Court said that “Sikhya Providers” under the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) are entitled to age relaxation in a government recruitment exam, depriving them from the relaxation would be violative of Article 21-A of the Constitution.
Title: Paramjit Kaur & others v. State of Punjab & others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 126
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has said that the FIR lodged for abetment to suicide cannot be quashed on the basis of compromise between parties, observing that where the primary victim is deceased, "the Courts must act as if it is directly answerable to the deceased and such cases be approached with the highest sense of responsibility and gravity ensuring that the rule of law is upheld."
Title: Divya Kalia v. State of Haryana and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 127
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has imposed a cost of Rs. 1.50 lakh on the Haryana Public Service Commission (HPSC) for wrongly rejecting a Haryana civil judge's candidature as a Scheduled Caste (SC) candidate.
Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sumeet Goel said, "A candidate cannot be afforded latitude for omission(s) on his part as the selecting/examining agency has to proceed on the basis of application and documents submitted by the candidate. In case an error has occurred on account of circumstances beyond the control of the applicant, namely, an incorrect/technically defective certificate(s), received by the candidate from the competent authority, having been presented by the candidate, in the back drop of such a candidate actually possessing the requisite qualification, some latitude may be extendable to such a candidate.”
Title: HARDEEP HANS v. THE STATE OF UT CHANDIGARH AND OTHERS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 128
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has directed Chandigarh's Director General of Police (DGP) to form a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to probe an alleged murder case wherein a practicing lawyer is stated to have succumbed to injuries after being assaulted by fellow lawyers in the District Court Complex.
Title: Muhammad Jamil v. State of Haryana
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 129
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has said that for foreign nationals engaging in unlawful activities, "a measured legal response necessitates vigilance at the point of entry rather than the indiscriminate denial of bail."
The Court suggested that, "The cornerstone of an effective deterrence mechanism lies in rigorous pre-admission scrutiny- comprehensive background verifications before visa issuance and the immediate revocation of visas upon credible and substantial allegations."
Title: JASPAL SINGH v. STATE OF PUNJAB
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 130
The intent of the legislature and the integrity of the rule of law must be preserved at all costs, and cannot be allowed to be undermined, irrespective of the quantity of drugs involved, said the Punjab & Haryana High Court while refusing bail involving 290 grams of heroin.
Title: Gurumukh Singh v. State of Punjab
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 131
The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Thursday (March 27) noted that farmers' leader Jagjit Singh Dallewal was not in illegal detention but was taken to hospital by Punjab Police as per Supreme Court's direction and thus disposed of a habeas corpus plea.
Relaxing Eligibility Criteria On Equity Basis Is Beyond Law, Courts Exercising Equitable Jurisdiction Must Be Vigilant Of Overreach: P&H HC
Title: Gurpreet Singh v. Guru Ravidas Ayurved University, VPO Kharkan, Una Road, District Hoshiarpur and another
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 132
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has said that while exercising equitable jurisdiction Court cannot relax the eligibility criteria required for the admission.
The plea was filed challenging the order to surrender admission for a BAMS degree on the Court that the candidate had not passed the qualifying examination from only one Board. In the present case, the petitioner passed Class XII from Punjab Board and Biology subject separately from Himachal Pradesh Board.
Title: STATE OF PUNJAB v. DHARMINDER SINGH ETC.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 133
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has upheld the acquittal in a drugs case, observing that the secret information received by the police officials was admittedly not reduced into writing, which is a requirement of Section 41(2) of the NDPS Act as well as Section 42 of the NDPS Act.
Title: Tushar Tanwar v. Bar Council of India
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 134
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has asked Bar Council of India (BCI) to decide representation of a lawyer challenging charging of separate fees of Rs 3500 besides registration fees for All India Bar Examination (AIBE).
Title: RAM CHANDER v. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 135
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has settled that that appeals, applications, trial, inquiry or investigation pending since before the commencement of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) (01 July 2024) are permitted to be continued in accordance with the provisions of CrPC.
Title: AMRIK SINGH v. STATE OF PUNJAB
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 136
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has raised concern on the possible misuse of Punjab Police power in anti-drugs drive started off late in Punjab, wherein all SSPs and SHOs will be given quantified targets and based on that, their performance will be assessed.
Title: Ranbir v. State of Haryana and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 137
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has said that relief cannot be denied to a candidate who was unjustly disqualified for Constable post on medical grounds merely because the State authorities filled the position during the pendency of the plea.
Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma and Justice Meenakshi I. Mehta said, "relief cannot be denied to the appellant merely because the respondents have chosen to fill up the posts inspite of pendency of the writ petition and the notices having been served upon them."
Title: Tabrej @ Tarif v. Haryana
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 138
The Punjab & Haryana High Court refused to grant anticipatory bail to a man accused in a "cyber fraud" case involving a person who posed as a police personnel from Delhi Crime Branch to allegedly extort money from the complainant.
Punjab & Haryana HC Declares Haryana Govt Notification Curtailing Land Rights Of 'Dholidars' As Unconstitutional.
Title: Manisha v. State of Haryana & Ors
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 139
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has stated that candidates applying for positions under the Punjab Police who fail to disclose that an FIR is pending against them will have their candidature liable to be rejected.
Title: Ram Sarup @ Sarup @ Ram Swaroop and Others v. Jaswinder Kaur and Others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 137
"With time, with the rise in the prices of property, there has been a decline in values. Murders take place over property disputes and civil litigation has become the order of the day", observed the Punjab & Haryana High Court while flagging decline in family values amid rising land-dispute litigations.
Child In Womb During Accident Entitled To Compensation Under MV Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court
Title: Smt. Krishna and another v. Rameshwar and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 139
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has said that a child in womb during motor vehicle accident is also entitled to compensation under the Motor Vehicle Act (MV Act).
Title: Bhawar Singh and another v. State of Haryana and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 140
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has declared the Haryana Government's notification unconstitutional, which made the application of amendments under the Haryana Dholidar, Butimar, Bhondedar, and Muqararidar (Vesting of Proprietary Rights) Act retrospective.
Title: Raiesh Ramachandran and another v. State of Puniab and another
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 141
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has quashed a defamation case filed against former Editor-in-Chief of The Tribune newspaper, and other journalist for reporting a statement made by Chief Minister Bhagwant Singh Mann in 2019 against then Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) MLA Nazar Singh Manshahia.
Title: XXX v. State of Haryana and another
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 142
The Punjab and Haryana High Court refused to expunge remarks against a police officer who was "prima facie" found to be involved in implicating innocents in a rape case by his alleged partner for extorting money.
Title: Harjit Kaur and another v. Union Territory of Chandigarh and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 143
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has set aside the order directing the vacation of the property under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, observing that order can only be passed when the senior citizen is the owner of the property in possession of their children or relative.
Title: STATE OF PUNJAB v. XXXX
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 144
The Punjab & Haryana High Court commuted death sentence awarded to a man into life imprisonment for the remainder of his natural life without the application of the provisions of premature release, for rape and murder of his 6-year-old daughter.
Title: XXX v. State of Punjab
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 145
The Punjab & Haryana High Court condemned the Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) for delaying in deciding the representation filed to the Police by a run-away couple.
Title: Gurpreet Singh Sabharwal v. Directorate of Enforcement
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 146
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has said that for the purpose of granting bail to an accused under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), it is not a mandatory requirement that the Court must arrive at a finding that the petitioner had not committed any offence under the PMLA.
Title: BIJENDER SINGH v. RAJ KUMAR AND ORS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 147
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has stated that merely because the claimant was driving a 'jugaad' vehicle (car without registration), compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act cannot be denied without proving his fault.
Title: Umesh Kumar Madhok v. State of Haryana and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 148
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has awarded Rs. 5 lakh compensation to a man whose land was "arbitrarily and discriminatorily" targeted for acquisition by the Haryana Government since 1962.
Title: M/s Prenda Creations Private Limited Union of India and others v. Union of India and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 149
The Punjab and Haryana High Court slammed the Customs Department for wrongfully and illegally withholding a consignment of a large quantity of kiwi fruit being imported into India and granted compensation of Rs. 50 lakh.
Title: Sonia v. State of Punjab and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 150
The Punjab & Haryana High Court disposed of plea challenging notice wherein an accused under NDPS Act was allegedly given 15 days time to appear and submit defence to prove that her house was not in violation of Punjab Building By laws.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 151
Title: M/s Bedi Hospital v. Chandigarh Administration and another
The Punjab & Haryana High Court said that if state authorities are allowed to breach contracts, then the rule of law, which is a constitutional pillar, will become ineffective.
Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice Vikas Suri said, "if there is yet an endowment of permissibility to State or its agencies to renege from the apposite contractual promises, or if the State agencies are not estopped from the mandate of the supra constitutional provisions, from thus making breaches vis-a-vis their contractual obligations cast upon them, therebys the basis of a welfare state, besides the basis of the rule of law, which is the pillar of the Constitution, but would become ineffective."
Title: XXX v. XXX
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 152
The Punjab and Haryana High Court refused to grant the interim custody of the 3-and-a-half-year-old son to the mother from the father, observing that the child is happy with the father and uprooting him would not be in his best interest.
Justice Vikram Aggarwal refused to consider allegation levelled against the child's father by the mother about his involvement with another girl.
Title: KULWINDER PAUL SINGH v. THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES AND OTHERS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 153
The Punjab & Haryana High Court flagged the delay in deciding appeals by Tax Appellate Authorities, observing that Appellate Authorities should endeavour to dispose of the appeals, preferably within one year as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Justice Arun Palli and Justice Sudeepti Sharma said, "Considering that substantial amount of revenue is involved in these appeals, and that such amount remain blocked during the pendency of the proceedings, it is imperative that the Appellate Authorities should endeavour to dispose of the appeals, preferably within one year as per the provisions of the Act."
Title: JAISHREE BAGGA v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 154
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has set aside the notification issued by the Punjab Government that had specified a cut-off date for granting electricity connections in unauthorized colonies, observing that receiving basic amenities in a plot is a fundamental right.
According to the notification, only those allottees who, up to 31st July 2024, had entered into powers of attorney or agreements to sell on stamp paper or possessed any registered document, were eligible to receive electricity connections.
Title: SABNAM KHATUN AND ORS V. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 155
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has directed the Punjab Government to frame a policy to regulate the operations of spa and massage centres within the State of Punjab, noting that under the guise of running such centres, prostitution rackets and immoral/human trafficking are taking place in several locations.
Title: Gurbir Singh v. State of Punjab
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 156
Flagging growing prevalence of immigration fraud rackets, the Punjab & Haryana High Court has said that there is "urgent need to adopt a stringent approach to deter such conduct."
Justice Manjari Nehru Kaul said, "Crimes involving immigration fraud have reached alarming proportions in recent years. Unsuspecting individuals are often lured with promises of overseas employment or education, and are made to part with substantial life savings."
Title: RAJBIR SINGH v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 157
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has upheld the Land acquisition of Haryana Government in National Capital Region (NCR) observing that Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and National Capital Region Planning Board Act (NCRPB Act) both serve different purposes and do not override each other.
Title: Suparna Bhalla v. State of Punjab and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 158
The Punjab & Haryana High Court said that a "robust and pragmatic approach" is warranted to combat the rising trend of deceitful manipulation involving real estates. It flagged that allowing such activities to continue unchecked would contribute towards creating serious repercussions contributing to recession-like circumstances.
Case Title: Dinesh Kumar v. State of Haryana
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 159
While dismissing a plea challenging allotment of flats in a scheme overseen by HUDA Urban Estate and Town and Country Planning Employees Welfare Organization, the Punjab & Haryana High Court said that an unsuccessful participant in a draw of lots under a housing scheme cannot challenge the allotment of houses after participating in the process, as he will be estopped from doing so.
Punjab & Haryana High Court Imposes ₹1 Lakh Cost On Man For Suppressing Material Facts
Title: M/s Dynamic (CG) Equipments Pvt. Ltd. through its Director Ashwani Kumar Mahandru & others v. JCB India Limited
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 160
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has imposed a cost of Rs. 1 lakh on a plea seeking quashing of complaint under Negotiable Instrument Act (NI Act), for suppressing that summoning order was challenged in revision and dismissed.
Justice Mahabir Singh Sindhu said, "now it is well settled law that a litigant, who attempts to pollute the stream of justice or who touches the pure fountain of justice with tainted hands, is not entitled to any relief, interim or final. Suppression of material facts from the Court of law, is actually playing fraud with the Court. The Latin maxim supressio veri, expressio falsi i.e. suppression of the truth is equivalent to the expression of falsehood, gets attracted."
Title: HARMEET SINGH SEHGAL V/S STATE OF PUNJAB
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 161
Observing that "the situation appears to be inexplicable nay deplorable," the Punjab & Haryana High Court has sought explanation from Punjab's Chief Director, State Vigilance Bureau for enquiring a corruption case for five years without registering FIR.
Title: Yashendra Singh v. State of Haryana
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 162
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has granted compensation of Rs. 5 Lakh to a Haryana Government Employee for arbitrarily denying him the flat under the "Super Deluxe category" despite fulfilling the eligibility criteria.
Title: The State of Haryana & Others v. Ram Singh & Another
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 163
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has set aside the compensation granted to a couple for the failure of a vasectomy operation, as a result of which the woman conceived and gave birth to a girl child.
In a move to control the fast-rising population of India, vasectomy operations were incentivised by the Haryana government in 1986 by offering payment.
Title: M/S FLORAL ELECTRICAL PVT. LTD. v. HARYANA VIDYUT PRASARAN NIGAM LTD. AND ANR
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 164
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has made it clear that when breach of contract is bonafidely explained then harsh penalty like blacklisting of company should not be imposed since it impacts on employment and business of people associated.
Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice Vikas Suri said, “ Where breach to a concluded contract becomes bonafidely explained besides when a bonafide dispute is raised by the person/entity concerned, against his/its purportedly omitting to perform its contractual obligation, thereupons, the appositely made penalty of blacklisting/debarment, thus ought not to be resorted to.”
Title: Jaskaran Singh v. State of Haryana and another
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 165
Observing that issuance of non bailable warrant "must not be exercised in a mechanical manner and must be adopted sparingly and only upon recording cogent reasons that reflect the necessity of such a stringent course," the Punjab & Haryana High Court set aside the bail cancellation order in a cheque bounce case.
Justice Sumeet Goel noted that the petitioner, after the grant of bail, was regularly appearing before the trial Court. However, on one date, the petitioner inadvertently failed to appear before the trial Court on account of his ill health. However, "the trial Court, straight away proceeded to issue non-bailable warrants against the petitioner."
Title: ADITYA KUMAR v. STATE OF HARYANA
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 166
The Punjab & Haryana High Court reduced the sentence in food adulteration case to already undergone observing that the convict was facing the agony of the legal proceeding since 1999.
It is pertinent to note that when a conviction is recorded under the provisions of Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (PFA), "neither the accused can be granted the benefit of Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 nor he can be sentenced to the period of imprisonment lesser than as provided in the Act."
Title: GURJEET SINGH v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 167
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has dismissed a plea challenging the transfer of an alleged Gram Panchayat land disturbing the water course of drain, to a private developer, observing that the watercourse was already abandoned long time ago.
Referring to Punjab Village Common Land (Regulation) Rules, Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice Vikas Suri said, "the abandoned paths or watercourses not under use in shamlat deh can be transferred by sale in accordance with the laid down procedure."
Title: Satnam Singh v. The State of Punjab
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 168
The Punjab & Haryana High Court granted Rs. 3 Lakh compensation to a convict in a drugs case who was kept in custody beyond the sentence imposed, observing that "Such violations are not mere administrative lapses; they are acts of constitutional disregard that demand accountability, redressal, and systemic correction."
Turning a blind eye to these injustices would not only embolden further violations but also diminish the very essence of a democratic society governed by the rule of law, it added.
Title: Sham Kumar v. State of Punjab and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 169
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has set aside the enhanced punishment imposed on a Punjab Police official for alleged misconduct in stopping a minor boy's vehicle. The boy was found with condoms and later died by suicide after being scolded by his father, who had been called by the police.
Justice Jagmohan Bansal said, "the petitioner committed alleged misconduct while discharging his official duties. He was awarded punishment of forfeiture of two increments for the alleged misconduct. The petitioner had not illegally or unofficially detained vehicle of a minor child. It was father of the child who scolded him. The petitioner could not be held responsible for the unfortunate incident to the extent that his rank is reduced from Assistant Sub-Inspector (Local Rank) to Constable."
26 Yrs On, Punjab & Haryana High Court Acquits Murder Accused; Doubts Police Constable's Testimony
Title: Som Nath v. State of Punjab
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 170
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has acquitted a man 26 years after he was accused of murdering the husband of a woman he was in relationship with, by assaulting and throwing the husband on a live railway track.
While doing so, a division bench of Justices Gurvinder Singh Gill and Jasjit Singh Bedi also expressed doubt as to the veracity of a Police constable's testimony who claimed that the deceased husband, who had lost a lot of blood due to amputation of both legs after being run over by a train, had named the accused back then.
Title: Camila Carolina de Matos Vilas Boas v. Union of India and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 171
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has allowed habeas corpus plea filed by a Canadian woman seeking custody of her child from father who allegedly detained him violating Canadian Court order.
Justice Manjari Nehru Kaul remarked, "Indian Courts cannot be reduced to instruments of convenience for litigating foreign nationals seeking to sidestep judicial proceedings in their own jurisdictions. The constitutional writ jurisdiction of the Indian Courts is neither designed nor intended to be misused in this manner."
Title: M/s Penguin Enterprises Pvt. Ltd v.State of Haryana and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 172
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has said that a property which is sold by a registered sale deed cannot be taken back by invocation of resumption proceeding, observing that the same will amount to violation of right to property under Article 300-A.
Title: Gurjant Singh v. State of Punajb
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 173
Taking a lenient view on the conviction in an NDPS case, the Punjab and Haryana High Court reduced the sentence of six months' imprisonment to the period already undergone by the convict.
The appellant was convicted under Section 22(b) of the the NDPS Act and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000. He was allegedly found in conscious possession of 115 loose intoxicating tablets.
Title: ANJU BANSAL V. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 174
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has asked a woman, appearing in person before it and seeking registration of corruption FIR against a Session Judge, to file a complaint with the HC Registry.
A division bench of Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sumeet Goel observed that the matter cannot be entertained on the judicial side.
"The petitioner who appears in person contends that she is aggrieved by the alleged act of illegality committed by the said judicial officer in a pending litigation before the said officer," the Court noted at the outset.
Title: Ashok Kumar Vs. State of Haryana
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 175
It is strange to note that the police officials are apparently acting like a court of law—releasing case property on superdari and deciding the admissibility of evidence, observed the Punjab and Haryana High Court, while slamming Haryana's Anti-Corruption Bureau for deviating from principles of criminal law.
The Court highlighted that the State's Anti Corruption Bureau (ACB) by wrongly interpretating Bhartiya Sakhya Adhiniyam (BSA) applying it at the stage of investigation, which is only applicable on judicial proceedings.
Title: GURCHARAN SINGH v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 176
The Punjab and Haryana High Court held that the loss of original records cannot be a ground to deny allotment of a residential plot to a man who was selected in a draw of lots by the Punjab Government in 1999. The Court also granted an “exemplary compensation" of Rs 2 lakh.
Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice Vikas Suri said, "If the apposite responsibility is not fixed upon the custodian of the records, thereupon he would go scot-free, besides therebys if the impugned annexure, rather becomes validated, thereupon the rights acquired by the allottees/ promisees but would become ill scuttled, rather merely on account of commission of torts of loss of records, but at the instance of the custodian concerned."
Title: M/S VATIKA LIMITED v. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 177
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has struck down a Haryana Government notification that empowered Real Estate Regulatory Authority's (HRERA) Adjudicating Officers to recover dues like Collectors.
Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice H.S. Grewal opined that the notification, issued on May 11, 2024, was not sanctioned under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016.
Title: XXX v. XXX
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 178
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has said that husband's unexplained relationship with another woman amounts to cruelty and that is sufficient to rupture marriage.
Justice Sudhir Singh and Justice Sukhvinder Kaur observed, “Though, the stand of the appellant-husband is that he had no illicit relations with said (lady), yet we find that maintaining relations with a lady outside the matrimonial alliance that too without any justified explanation, certainly amounts to cruelty and rather, the said fact is sufficient to cause ruptures in the matrimonial alliance of the parties.”
Title: Sachin Ahlawat v. Central Bureau of Investigation
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 179
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has made it clear that if sanction to prosecute a public servant is not granted under Prevention of Corruption Act then he cannot be prosecuted for the offence of criminal conspiracy.
Justice Manjari Nehru Kaul said, "view that a public servant, in respect of whom sanction to prosecute has not been granted under Section 19 of the PC Act, and who is, therefore, not charged with any substantive offence under the said Act, cannot be proceeded against solely under Section 120-B of the IPC, when the alleged object of the conspiracy is the commission of offences under the PC Act."
Title: Raja Rekhi v. State of Haryana and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 180
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has said that a parent cannot be implicated for the offence of kidnapping their own child as both parents are equal natural guardians.
Justice Harpreet Singh Brar said, “For an incident to be considered as kidnapping, it is necessary that the minor child is taken away from the custody of a 'lawful guardian.' However, a mother falls well within its ambit, especially in absence of an order passed by a competent Court, divesting her of the same. This Court is of the view that a parent cannot be implicated for kidnapping their own child as both the parents are his equal natural guardians.”
Title: M/S POWER GRID CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD. v. HARYANA SHEHRI VIKAS PRADHIKARAN AND OTHERS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 181
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has quashed the extension fees of Rs. 93.12 Crore imposed on a government organisation by the Haryana Urban Development Authority (HUDA) for delay in construction of flats for government employee on land allotted in 1996.
The Court found that the delay in construction was due to procedural and administrative requirements, hence the delay period will be considered as as "zero period."
Title: SXXXXX v. RXXXXX
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 182
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has dissolved the marriage of a couple who were living separately for the last 17 years, observing that compelling them to live together would be fiction supported by a legal tie and amounts to cruelty.
Justice Sudhir Singh and Justice Sukhvinder Kaur said, "the parties, who have been living separately since 2008, if compelled to live together, would become a fiction supported by a legal tie and it would show scant regard for the feelings and emotions of the parties. This, in itself would amount to mental cruelty to born the parties."
Title: Dr. ANIL BANSAL v. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 183
The Punjab & Haryana High Court granted Rs. 5 Lakh compensation to a doctor for facing repeated trauma and harassment by the officials of Haryana Urban Development Authority (HUDA) who unjust cancelled the plot allotted for building a hospital.
Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice Vikas Suri said, "Now for the prima facie commissions of torts of malfeasance, non-feasance and misfeasance, thus on the part of the HUDA and its officials, besides for the repeated trauma and harassment becoming wreaked upon the petitioner, thereupon, as such, the instant writ petition, is also allowed, with exemplary compensation comprised in a sum of Rs.5 lacs becoming encumbered upon the respondent concerned."
Title: Sonu @ Rinka v. State of Punjab
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 184
The Punjab and Haryana High Court, in an NDPS case involving commercial quantity of heroin, said that bail cannot be granted merely because there is a 'minute difference' between the colour of the contraband seized and the colour of the substance described in the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) report.
Counsel for the petitioner was seeking bail primarily on the ground that the colour of the drug recovered, as per the seizure memo, is described as 'bhura'—which, according to him, means brown—whereas in the FSL report, it is stated to be 'off-white' in colour.
Title: Vikram and others v. State of Haryana and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 185
Observing that an advertisement to the post cannot be contrary to law, the Punjab & Haryana High Court has directed to consider candidates unjustly denied benefit of reservation for the post of Assistant Lineman.
Jagmohan Bansal said, "There is no change in the legal position from 2013 to 2024. In the absence of change in legal position, there was no reason to deny benefit of reservation to persons with disability of one leg in 2019-2020 and grant in 2023. The stand of respondent is contradictory, arbitrary and whimsical."
Title: EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND PENSIONERS WELFARE ASSOCIATION Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 186
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has said that the retired employees who did not exercise the joint option before September 1, 2014, cannot be automatically excluded from Employees Pension (Amendment) Scheme 2014.
Pertinent to note that the Apex Court in 2022 in Employees Provident Fund Organization versus B Sunil Kumar said that the employees, who were entitled to join the pension scheme but could not do so as they did not exercise the option within the cut-off date, should be given an additional opportunity as there existed lack of clarity regarding the cut-off date in view of the High Court judgments invalidating the provisions of the Employee's Pension (Amendment) Scheme, 2014. Therefore, the Court exercised its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to extend the cut-off date.
Title: Gurmej Singh and another v. State of Punjab
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 187
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has ordered the removal of unauthorised Mandir and Gurudwara constructed on a road meant for public ingress and outgress to a commerical market, and gave six weeks time to remove holy scriptures/books/idols from the structures after due observance of all religious ceremonies.
Justice Harsh Bunger perusing the documents found that there is, "no manner of doubt that the construction of Mandir as well as Gurudwara has been raised without there being any sanctioned building plan/layout plan. It has also not been shown that before raising construction of any such religious structure, any approval from the competent authority was sought or any such provision has been made in the layout plan of the colony."
Title: Suresh Pal v. Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 188
Highlighting the need for stronger administrative accountability, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has emphasized the role of legal education and training in curbing the increasing tendency of administrative authorities to shift responsibility to the judiciary.
Justice Jasgurpreet Singh Puri noted that when the administrative authorities by their acts and omissions evade their own responsibilities and leave it to the Courts to decide, it leads to a “let the Court decide syndrome” which can be dismantled inter alia by taking pre-emptory measures like legal education, training and accountability.
Title: Faith Buildtech Private Limited v. State of Haryana and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 189
The Punjab & Haryana High Court set aside the part of 2020 amendment to the Haryana Development and Regulation of Urban Areas Rules that required the scrutiny fees, licence fees, conversion charges etc to be forfeited in exchange for surrender of development license.
Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice Vikas Suri said, "the impugned annexures are quashed, and, set aside to the extent that therebys unjust enrichments are ill endowed to the licensor, besides therebys unjust expropriations qua the sums of moneys earlier deposited are made against the licencee."
Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Conviction Of 74-Yr-Old In 2000 Visa Fraud Case
Title: CHARANJIT KAUR v. STATE OF PUNJAB
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 190
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has upheld the conviction of a 74 years old lady in 24 years old immigration fraud case, observing that "Courts must do as much as is possible to nip this evil in the bud and undue sympathy must not be shown."
Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi said, “Such offences of attempted illegal immigration are on the rise. Life savings are used up or loans availed to pay agents both legal and illegal in order to fulfill ones desired for greener pastures abroad. The person is usually cheated by the agent as he is not sent abroad after receipt of the promised amount by the agent. If he manages to go abroad, then his journey is fraught with danger from agents/people smugglers who physically abuse the prospective immigrant enroute to his destination and even extort more money from him during the course of his journey.”
Title: Parveen Gambhir and others v. Union of India and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 191
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has made it clear that in the event of any conflict between Rules of the Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (HRERA) and Section 14 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA), the latter will prevail.
A division bench of Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice Vikas Suri said, "Therefore, the test of inconsistency or repugnancy inter se the HRERA Rules, and, the provisions enclosed in Section 14 of the RERA Act, becomes rested upon the mandate enclosed in Section 14 of the RERA Act. If in the HRERA Rules, there was a provision inconsistent with the provisions embodied in Section 14 of the RERA Act, thereupons the provisions enclosed in Section 14 of the RERA Act, rather would have an overriding effect over the purportedly inconsistent therewith provisions embodied in some other statute."
Title: Sanjiv Kumar v. State of Haryana
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 192
Observing that "security and privacy" of police officials has been taken care of by the Supreme Court in Suresh Kumar vs. Union of India, the Punjab & Haryana High Court directed the preservation of relevant call records of police officials after the accused moved a plea claiming he had been falsely implicated in an NDPS case.
Justice Rajesh Bhardwaj referring to Suresh Kumar case said, "security and privacy of the police officials investigating he case has been taken care of. The call records as sought to be preserved by the petitioner is to prove his innocence. Hence, keeping in view the ratio of law as held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Suresh Kumar's case (supra), the present petition is allowed and the order dated 08.05.2024 is set aside."
Title: Rakesh Bansal v. State of Punjab [along with connected petitions]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 193
The Punjab & Haryana High Court refused to grant bail to 17 accused in an alleged "big drugs racket" operating in Punjab observing that bail cannot be granted on the ground of long custody when alleged recovery of drugs is "heavy".
The accused persons were booked in an 2020 FIR wherein it was alleged that they had formed a racket, engaged in procuring intoxicant tablets & narcotic substance from outside the State and supplying the same in villages of Punjab.
Title: XXX v. XXXX
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 194
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that a wife seeking divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act (HMA) must be actually physically residing within the territorial jurisdiction of the court where the petition is filed.
According to Section 19(iii-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, a petition under the Act shall be presented to the district court within the local limits of whose ordinary original civil jurisdiction the wife is residing on the date of presentation of the petition, in cases where she is the petitioner.
Title: Jashandeep Kaur and others v. Union of India and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 195
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has reiterated that while the decisions of other High Courts, especially those supported by detailed reasoning, may carry high persuasive value, they do not constitute binding precedent for courts outside their jurisdiction.
Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sumeet Goel said, "While a pronouncement from a High court, particularly one rendered after detailed analysis and reasoned exposition, may command high persuasive authority, it does not operate as a precedent in the binding sense for other High Courts.
Title: Rabina v. Arshad and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 196
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has said that house wife's value of service while calculating the compensation for Motor Vehicle Accident claim cannot be taken as minimum tier of earnings as that of unskilled worker.
The Court highlighted that a housewife performs "numerous duties" while nurturing her home and taking care of husband and children, the value of her services, in any case, cannot be taken at the minimum tier of earnings as that of unskilled worker.
Title: STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER Vs KARAMJEET KAUR
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 197
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has said that requiring college students to travel long distances to remote areas to take exams creates unnecessary hardship and violates right to education under Article 21 of the constitution.
Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice Vikas Suri said, study and exam centers should be easy for students to reach, especially those studying online or through distance learning. Requiring these centers to be only at the main campus of the university—often far from students' homes—can cause serious stress and hardship. This rule can also place a heavy financial burden on students from poor or marginalized backgrounds.
Title: Union Territory, Chandigarh and others v. Sakshi Malik and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 198
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has said that the essential qualification for the post of Junior Basic Teacher (JBT) should be in conformity with the Right To Education Act (RTE) and the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) which is either Diploma in Elementary Education or Bachelor in Elementary Education.
The Court was hearing a plea filed by the Chandigarh Administration. challenging the order of CAT which had directed to consider the candidates for recruitment of JBT possessing either Diploma in Elementary Education or Bachelor in Elementary Education.
Title: RXXXXX v. XXXX
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 199
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has made it clear that for determining Court's jurisdiction "ordinarily resident" of child need not be permanent or or uninterrupted residence.
According to Section 9 of the Guardians And Wards Act, if the application is with respect to the guardianship of the person of the minor, it shall be made to the District Court having jurisdiction in the place where the minor "ordinarily resides."
Title: Jatinder Singh v. State of Haryana
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 200
"Opposing the release of an accused on bail solely because he refuses to testify against himself is a draconian practice that, in good conscience, cannot be allowed to continue unchecked by the Court", said the Punjab & Haryana High Court while allowing a pre-arrest bail in vehicle theft case.
Justice Harpreet Singh Brar noted that in the status report filed by the State it has been stated that the accused failed to cooperate during the investigation because he refused to answer questions, hence his custody is required.
Title: Vinod Kumar v. State of Haryana and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 201
The Punjab and Haryana has held that persons involved in minor offences should not be deprived of the opportunity to serve in state services.
The development comes while upholding the validity of a provision of the Punjab Police (Haryana Amendment) Rules, 2015, which denies appointment to candidates against whom the charges have been framed for offences punishable with imprisonment for three years or more.
Title: Jaswinder Singh v. State of Punjab
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 202
Observing that "the act of coercing an ordinary citizen to pay a bribe for availing a rightful service amounts to gross misconduct," the Punjab and Haryana High Court has refused anticipatory bail to a junior engineer accused of demanding a bribe of Rs. 1000 for signing a routine file.
The allegation against the government official, a junior engineer, was that he demanded Rs.1,000 to sign a file related to a routine electric connection transfer application.
Title: M/S SIEL INDUSTRIAL ESTATE LTD. VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 203
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that the arbitrary termination of a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) by the government for a project that had vested title over land amounts to a violation of the petitioner's fundamental rights under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution.
Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice Vikas Suri said, "since therebys, there was complete vestment of right, title and interest over the subject ands vis-a-vis the petitioner...whereupon, when therebys the petitioner became endowed with the fundamental right to practice business and profession."
Title: Keval Singh @ KV Dillon v. State of Punjab
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 204
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has quashed an FIR lodged against the producer of movie "Shooter" for allegedly inciting youth to participate in armed activities, which were likely to affect public peace and harmony adversely.
The FIR was lodged under Section 153 (Wantonly giving provocation with intent to cause riot), 153-A (Promoting enmity between different groups), 153-B (Imputations, assertions prejudicial to national integration), 160 (Affray), 107 (Abetment) and 505 (Statements conducing public mischief) IPC.
Title: Ashok Kumar Sharma v. State of Punjab
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 205
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has declared the arrest of an accused in a drugs case illegal, finding that no reasons for the search of his premises were recorded and that the investigating agency also failed to provide the grounds of arrest in compliance with BNSS.
It was alleged that on basis of secret information, a huge amount of drug money was recovered in the form of foreign currency from accused person's premises.
Title: Amandeep Singh @ Aman v. State of Punjab
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 206
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has refused to grant anticipatory bail to a hair stylist and social-media influencer whose hair growth promising oil resulted into an allergic reaction, observing that "advertising a product making tall, misleading claims, without any scientific evidence or clinical testing to back it up, must be strictly condemned."
"Beauty, in spite of being fleeting and superficial in nature, has beguiled mankind since time immemorial", said Justice Harpreet Singh Brar while quoting Shakespeare's 16th century play- A Midsummer Night's Dream which states, “Love looks not with the eyes, but with the mind; and therefore is winged Cupid painted blind.”
Title: PXXXXX v. State of Haryana and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 207
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that an FIR registered under the the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO) cannot be quashed solely because on attaining majority, the victim chooses to enter into a compromise with the accused.
Justice Namit Kumar said, "...FIRs involving heinous crimes like rape, especially under POCSO Act, cannot be quashed on the ground that victim after attaining the age of majority has chosen to compromise the matter with the accused without any reason and further exercising jurisdiction under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 to quash an offence under Section POCSO Act would also go against the objects and reasons of the legislature."
Title: Harsimran Kaur v. State of Punjab and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 208
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has regularized the admission of a student who completed her degree while her plea challenging the order whereby her admission was cancelled was still pending, underscoring the "cardinal principle that no litigant ought to suffer a detriment owing to the vicissitudes of judicial delay."
A division bench of Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sumeet Goel in its order said, "...no party should suffer because of the fault or delay of the Court. Where judicial proceedings have been protracted not by the inaction or negligence of a litigant, but rather due to institutional delays beyond the party's control, the judiciary ought to adopt a corrective, rather than punitive stance."
Case Title: Virender Kumar and others v. State of Haryana and others [with connected matters]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 209
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has upheld the validity of part-time B.Tech (Civil Engineering) degrees awarded by Deen Bandhu Chhotu Ram University of Science and Technology, Murthal, declaring them equivalent to regular courses for promotional purposes.
Referring to Supreme Court's decision in Dr.B. L. Asawa vs State of Rajasthan and others (1982) a division bench of Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma and Justice H.S. Grewal in its order observed, "once a degree is awarded by a duly recognized institution, the question of its recognition or equivalence is primarily for the employer to determine and unless specifically declared invalid by a competent authority such a degree must be treated as valid for all service matters. It was further held that the Courts should not sit in judgment over the standards or quality of degree awarded by a university unless there is an allegation of gross regularities."
Punjab & Haryana High Court Warns Litigant For Making 'Intemperate' Remarks On Judges
Title: Chandu Lal v. Smt. Maya Devi deceased through LRs
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 210
The Punjab and Haryana High Court left a litigant with stern warning who made "intemperate remarks" against three High Court judges and District Judge, considering that he lacked legal knowledge.
Punjab & Haryana High Court Rejects PIL Seeking 'Martyr' Status For Pahalgam Terror Attack Victims
Title: Ayush Ahuja v. Union of India
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 211
The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Tuesday (May 20) rejected a PIL seeking to declare the 26 tourists who died in the Pahalgam Terrorist Attack as "Martyrs".
Title: Taranjeet Singh v. State of Punjab
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 212
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has flagged a "disturbing trend" in which, under the guise of the seemingly simple job title of “Bouncer,” employers are increasingly enabling a culture of intimidation and bullying.
Title: Rajeev Arora v. Central Bureau of Investigation
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 213
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has dismissed a series of petitions challenging the summoning orders issued in the high-profile Manesar land scam case, which involves former Haryana Chief Minister Bhupendra Singh Hooda. The petitions were filed by various accused seeking relief from the criminal proceedings initiated by a special CBI court.
Title: Dharminder Singh @ Tunda v. State of Punjab
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 214
If an accused sets up a claim of his false implication on the ground that no sensible person would carry contraband in a transparent bag on the logic that such visibility makes detection certain and thus defies common sense, then at the same time, this very logic must also apply to the police, said the Punjab & Haryana High Court.
Title: M/s Kamboj Ultrasound and Diagnostic Pvt. Ltd. & ors v. State of Haryana
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 215
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has set aside the conviction order passed in 2008 under Pre-Conception and Prenatal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 (PC and PNDT Act) after finding that the complaint against the diagnostic centre was not made by the appropriate authority.
Title: Bagel Singh v. State of Punjab
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 216
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has expressed concern over the growing number of property fraud cases against Non-Resident Indians (NRIs), terming it a “disturbing trend."
Title: State of U. T. Chandigarh and others v. Poonam and others
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 217
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has imposed a cost of Rs.25,000 on Union Territory of Chandigarh for mechanically rejecting a specially-abled daughter's claim for family pension.
Title: Daljit Kaur v. State of Punjab and others
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 218
Observing that allowing the act of policeman who shot a man without giving opportunity to arrest, "to go unchecked would effectively mean validating a death sentence, passed not in line with the due process of law", the Punjab & Haryana High Court granted Rs. 15 lakh compensation to deceased's mother.
Title: JAGDISH SINGH BHOLLA V/S STATE OF PUNJAB
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 219
The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Wednesday suspended sentence and granted bail to dismissed Punjab DSP Jagdish Bhola, who is alleged kingpin in the 2013 multi-crore drug racket.
Title: XXX v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 220
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has made it clear that the offence of outraging modesty of a woman in a public place cannot be compromised and would fall in the category of a serious offence "notwithstanding the fact that the punishment provided under Section 354 of the IPC is imprisonment for a term of not less than one year but which may extend to five years."
Title: Ronnie Singh Salh v. State of Punjab
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 221
The Punjab & Haryana High Court rejected the pre-arrest bail plea of a Punjab Police Personnel allegedly involved in the brutally assaulting an Army Officer and his son.
Title: Shifali Verma and others v. Panjab University, Chandigarh and another
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 222
The Punjab & Haryana High Court refused to quash the law entrance examination conducted by Panjab University for the 5-year undergraduate law course, which was challenged on the grounds of being too difficult.
Title: NEERAJ v. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER [along with connected petitions]
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 223
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has quashed the Haryana Government's 2019 notification awarding up to 10 bonus marks for “socio-economic criteria and experience” in recruitment for Group B and C posts, after holding it to be in violation of Articles of 14, 15 and 16 of the Constitution.
Title: KAMLESH v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 224
"Expressing shock" as how an alleged A-category gangster was able to get modified bulletproof vehicle registered in Punjab, the Punjab & Haryana High Court has sought affidavits from the State Governments, Union Territory and the Centre.
Right To Personal Liberty Includes Right To Hold Or Possess Passport: P&H High Court
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 225
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has reiterated that mere pendency of a criminal case cannot be considered a valid ground to deny passport facilities to a person.
Referring to a catena of judgments, Justice Harsh Bunger in his order said,
"mere pendency of criminal case cannot be the ground to deny passport facilities to an applicant since right to personal liberty not only includes applicant's right to travel abroad, but also applicant's right to possess or hold a passport."
P&H High Court Sets Deadline For Concluding Disciplinary Action Against Judges
Title: Sudhir Pramar v. Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh and others
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 226
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has asked the High Court to ensure that all disciplinary enquiry against judges are completed within 6 months and 25 days.
Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice H.S. Grewal said, "The High Court is requested to ensure that in all, ongoing and as well as disciplinary inquiries to be initiated in the future, the following time line (6 months and 25 days) be adhered to failing which punitive action be taken against Inquiry Officer or any other erring personnel of the High Court."
Punjab & Haryana High Court Acquits Two Sentenced To Death For Gang Rape And Murder
Title: STATE OF HARYANA v. SUMIT @ FUNDI & ANOTHER
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 227
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has acquitted two men who had been convicted and sentenced to death by the Trial Court in 2022 for the rape and murder of a 19-year-old girl.
A bench of Justice Gurvinder Singh Gill and Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi said, "...there is some suspicion regarding the accused having committed the offence. However, the chain of circumstantial evidence available on record is not so complete so as to conclusively and unerringly point towards the guilt of the accused."
Title: RAN VEER v. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 228
Observing that "it is baffling to see that in spite of the widespread nature of this malady, no legislative framework to combat the same," the Punjab & Haryana High Court issued slew of directions to Governments of both the states to deal with gangster related activities and organised crime.
High Court Permits Re-Evaluation Of Punjab Civil Judge Aspirant's Answer Sheet By Expert Panel
Title: Rustam Garg v. Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh and others
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 229
The Punjab & Haryana High Court while allowing a Punjab Civil Judge 2016 candidate's plea for re-evaluation of a question in English paper, said that when impugned evaluation if found to be wholly erroneous it must be send to another expert panel.
Title: Satyaveer Singh v. State of Haryana and others
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 230
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has made it clear that forfeiting 10 annual increments of a police officer for being absent from duty for one day is disproportionate to the misconduct.
Title: GXXXX v. State of Punjab
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 231
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has said that although "an application for pre-arrest bail can be filed even by a person residing outside the country, however, the only limitation is that prior to the final hearing, the applicant must be inside the country" to enable the Court to impose and enforce bail conditions.
Title: Malkit Singh and another v. State of U. T. Chandigarh and others
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 232
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has frowned upon the "elite class" still following the Britishers and looking down upon their own countrymen doing small businesses.
A division bench of Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma and Justice Meenakshi I. Mehta said that we're a country of homogenous population where "a Tribal lady of a remote village can now be the President of India, and a worker from the grass-root level may reach up to the highest echelons of the administration."
Title: GURMEET SINGH V/S STATE OF PUNJAB
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 233
The Punjab & Haryana High Court denied the plea for interim bail of four weeks in an attempt to murder case, which was sought by the accused for the purpose of sowing agriculture crop for the the upcoming season.
Title: Narinder Kumar Joshi v. Directorate General, Goods & Service Tax Intelligence
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 234
Observing that jail should not be the norm in all economic offences, especially when the allegations are not of a grave nature, the Punjab & Haryana High Court recently granted relief in a tax evasion case.
Title: Ankur Lal v. Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court and another
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 235
The Punjab & Haryana High Court upheld the dismissal of a Haryana Civil Judge whose integrity was found "doubtful" after receiving several complaints during his probation period.
Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sumeet Goel rejected the dismissed judge's argument that after completion of the period of probation of two years plus the extended period of one year and in the backdrop of available vacancies in the cadre, his service ought to have been "deemed to be confirmed."
Title: Joginder Singh Sekhon and another v. State of Punjab and others
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 236
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has directed to restore custody of a minor son to his Australian mother, observing that giving custody of the child to father who has remarried and living with second wife is not conducive to the welfare of the child.
Notably, the Australian Court had granted custody of the mother and father was only given the visitation rights.
Title: State of Haryana and others v. Rani Devi
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 237
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has said Annual Confidential Report (ACR) or Annual Performance Appraisal Report serves as a critical tool in evaluating the performance of employees, and since adverse remarks can deprive of promotion, it should be backed with reasons.
Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma and Justice Meenakshi I. Mehta said, "Remarks made in the annual performance appraisal report or annual confidential reports, reflects the working of an individual. It creates civil rights because if the ACRs are tone-down or adverse remarks are entered, the concerned person would be deprived of his promotion as well as benefit of MACP for that period. Thus, before making any such remarks, reasons have to be mentioned".
Title: Surender Lather v. State of Haryana and another
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 238
The Punjab & Haryana High Court delivered split verdict on appointment of alleged tainted candidate in 2004 Haryana Civil Services recruitment.
Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma allowed the intra court appeal and directed to appoint the candidate, whereas Justice Meenakshi I. Mehta dismissed the plea.
Title: Dr Rosy Arora v. UT Chandigarh
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 239
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has refused to transfer investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in a medical tourism fraud case.
As per the allegations, a Kenyan resident was cheated by the petitioner and her dentist husband, who had offered her a medical tourism package. It was alleged that the woman was not treated properly and suffered a significant financial loss.
XXX v. State of Punjab
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 240
The Punjab & Haryana High Court acquitted three men of rape charge giving them benefit of doubt, after twenty years of conviction.
Justice Kirti Singh said, "It is trite law that case of prosecution has to stand on its own legs and it must prove its case beyond shadow of reasonable doubt. In view of the material contradictions noted...the whole prosecution story rests on quicksand, as the prosecution has failed to establish its case beyond shadow of reasonable doubt."
Title: UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS v. No.3363188-W EX SEP SWARAN SINGH AND ANOTHER
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 241
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has criticized the Union Government for its insensitive attitude towards the rights of ex-servicemen, observing that the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) is being overwhelmed with litigation due to the government's failure to comply with a Supreme Court ruling.
Title: Deepak Bamber v. State of Haryana and Ors [along with other decisions]
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 242
The Punjab & Haryana High Court while upholding the Haryana Government's instruction to grant reservation to Scheduled Caste candidates in promotion in Group 'A' & 'B' posts in State Government Services directed to exclude "creamy layer."
Justice Jagmohan Bansal said, "this Court finds that respondent has duly complied with attributes of Article 16(4A) of the Constitution of India as well as law laid down by the Apex Court, thus, impugned instructions dated 07.10.2023 (Annexure P-2) are valid and hereby upheld. Nevertheless, the respondent shall exclude employees belonging to creamy layer before implementing impugned instructions."
Title: Kewal Singh v. State of Punjab
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 243
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has made it clear that the anticipatory bail in corruption case can be granted only in exceptional cases, the court is required to be prima facie satisfied either of false implication, political vendetta, or manifest frivolity in the complaint.
Justice Manjari Nehru Kaul said, "it is well settled law, and reaffirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Devinder Kumar Bansal Versus State of Punjab, that anticipatory bail in cases involving offences under the Corruption Act is to be granted only in the rarest of rare circumstances. The court is required to be prima facie satisfied either of false implication, political vendetta, or manifest frivolity in the complaint."
Title: Inderjit Singh v. State of Punjab and others
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 244
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has directed to release retiral benefits of a former police officer, withheldi due to a pending FIR registered nearly two decades ago.
The Court noted that the challan was presented before the Trial in 2005 and he is unable to get his retiral dues because of the pending FIR. "He cannot be held guilty for non-adjudication of the FIR," said the Court.
Title: Bhakra Beas Management Board v. State of Punjab and another
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 245
The Punjab & Haryana High Court dismissed an application filed by the Punjab Government to recall order passed on May 06, which paved the way for the release of Bhakra dam water to Haryana, by directing it to abide by the decision of the meeting held on May 02 conducted by Central Government's Home Secretary.
According to the Union Government's submission, on May 2, the Centre's Home Secretary at New Delhi convened a meeting and decided to release of extra 4500 cusec of water to Haryana in 8 days to meet the emergent needs of Haryana.
Title: MXXXXX v. XXXXXX
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 246
The Punjab & Haryana High Court granted bail to a man accused of committing rape on pretext of false promise of marriage considering that the prosecutrix and the accused were in a long standing cordial relationship and the possibility of the relationship being "no strings attached" cannot be entirely ruled out.
Perusing the transcript of the conversation between the accused and the prosecutrix, Justice Vinod S. Bhardwaj noted, "there was a long standing cordial relationship between the prosecutrix and the petitioner and the possibility of the relationship being without any commitment and with no strings attached cannot be entirely ruled out."
Title: Chaman Lal Kanda and another v. State of Punjab
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 247
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has said that mere knowledge of the whereabout of the offender is not sufficient to attract office of "Harbouring Offender" without prove that the accused helped him (offender) to save from arrest.
The observation was made while quashing an FIR lodged under Section 212 IPC (Harbouring offender) and Section 216 IPC (Harbouring offender who has escaped from custody or whose apprehension has been ordered) alleging that the father has given shelter to his son in a cruelty case in order to evade his arrest.
Title: Neeraj Sharma v. State of Punjab and Others
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 248
The Punjab & Haryana High Court rejected plea of a spy's son to grant him a post of higher rank after his father passed away observing that there is no such policy of Punjab Government.
The petitioner stated that he possessed a B.Sc. (Medical) degree and was offered the position of Constable after his father's death. However, being dissatisfied with the rank, he made a representation to the Punjab Government, which was rejected."
Title: RUPINDER SINGH VS STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 249
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has declared the formula issued by the Punjab Government to calculate the conviction period in case of premature release as invalid, observing that parole period should only be subtracted from the total sentence and not from the actual time spent in jail.
Justice Harpreet Singh Brar said, "It is directed that the parole period shall only be subtracted from the total sentence and not from the actual sentence. Actual sentence shall only mean the real time spent by a prisoner in the prison premises."
Title: Avijit Chander and others v. Union Territory, Chandigarh and others
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 250
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has dismissed a petition challenging the Chandigarh Union Territory's decision to reallocate seats reserved under the Union Territory (UT) Pool quota to the All India Quota (AIQ) for admission to postgraduate medical courses.
The Court upheld the UT's move, emphasizing that the controversy for residential quota in the MD/MS admissions in the Government Medical Hospital Chandigarh (GMCH) has already been decided by the Apex Court in Shrey Goel's judgment.
Title: VINOD KUMAR V/S STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 251
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has said that as per Punjab Police Rules (PPR) concurrence of the District Magistrate will not be required to initiate disciplinary proceedings against police men in corruption cases.
Justice Jagmohan Bansal referring to PPR (Rule 16.40) said, "The authorities were supposed to initiate judicial prosecution or departmental proceedings depending on circumstances of each case. There is no requirement to seek concurrence of District Magistrate under Rule 16.40, thus, respondent has lawfully initiated departmental proceedings."
Title: Kirandeep Kaur and others v. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited and others
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 252
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has said that if the second wife who was appointed as nominee by the husband will be entitled for compassionate appointment by the Government even if the first wife was not legally divorced.
In the present case the law officer of the concerned department had opined that first marriage of the deceased employee was dissolved by the Panchayat which had no legal sanctity, hence the second marriage would not be valid. Considering the opinion, the compassionate appointment to the second wife was declined.
Title: Kamalpreet Kaur and another v. State of Punjab & Ors
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 253
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has remarked that ignorance of the Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) issued by the State Governments in pursuance of Kajal case has flooded the High Court with protection petitions by runaway couples.
Justice Rohit Kapoor noted that the Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) notified by the Government of Punjab, Haryana and the Union Territory of Chandiarh in pursuance to Kajal versus State of Haryana and others' have not been widely circulated and due to the ignorance of the same, the Court is flooded with litigation, “without first waiting for the representations to be decided by the concerned authorities within the time periods stipulated under the said SOPs and without availing the alternate remedy of filing appeals against any order as provided under the said SOPs.”
Selection Process Cannot Be Kept Open Indefinitely, Violates Article 14: Punjab & Haryana High Court
Title: NARESH KUMAR AND ANR. v. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 254
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has refused to interfere in 2014 advertisement for the post of Forest Guard observing that the selection process cannot be kept open indefinitely as the same would be violative of Article 14.
Justice Vinod S. Bhardwaj said, "The selection process cannot be kept open indefinitely. Keeping a selection process open-ended undermines the certainty and finality essential to public administration. An indefinite selection process also violates the principles of Article 14 of the Constitution as it allows unequal treatment of candidates and denies a level playing field to the future candidates."
Title: Gurdial Singh Kachure v. State of Punjab
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 255
"Humanity has suffered enough environmental damage," observed the Punjab and Haryana High Court as it refused to grant pre-arrest bail to a man accused of illegal mining.
Chief Justice Sheel Nagu said, "that humanity has suffered enough environmental damage especially to the river as well as to the environment at large, the offence of illegal mining in rivers needs to be taken in all seriousness despite less punishment prescribed under the said Act and therefore, this Court deems it appropriate not to interfere in the matter."
Title: STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS v. SARWAN RAM AND OTHERS
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 256
Employees cannot be denied the right to regularisation of service merely because they were engaged as daily wagers, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has held.
Justice Sudhir Singh and Justice Alok Jain said, "Once the appellants have not disputed the length of service of the respondents (writ petitioners), they cannot deny their legal right for being considered or entitled to regularization merely on the ground that they have been working as such on daily wages. Grant of any indulgence on such count would amount to allowing the appellants to take benefit of their dominion."
Title: Anuj Malik v. The Union of India and others
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 257
The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Friday (June 20) refused to entertain a PIL seeking to restrain all online opinion trading platforms, mobile applications, websites, and digital mediums from advertising and/or facilitating betting and wagering activities, which was said to be in violation of the Public Gambling Act.
Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sumeet Goel said, "since there exists adequate statutory frameworks for redressal of the grievances articulated in the petition in hand, including The Haryana Prevention of Public Gambling Act, 2025, there arises no occasion for this Court to entertain the petition in hand under its extraordinary writ jurisdiction."
Title: Mehar Singh Rattu v. The Registrar of Punjab and Haryana High Court,
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 258
The Punjab & Haryana High Court today (June 20) dismissed a former Additional Session Judge's plea challenging the full court's decision to compulsorily retire him in 2000 in "public interest."
Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sumeet Goel observed that "the phrase 'Public Interest' is inherently broad and falls within the exclusive domain of the competent authority, whose subjective satisfaction in this regard is not ordinarily subject to judicial review."
Title: Lakshay Chahal v. Haryana Staff Selection Commission and another
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 259
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has issued a stern warning against the filing of meritless petitions that challenge the answers or evaluation methods of competitive examinations.
The development ensued while hearing a plea challenging the answer key issued by the Haryana Staff Selection Commission for the post of Junior Engineer (Civil).
Title: Vijay Bansal v. State of Haryana and others
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 260
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has directed the Haryana Government to identify and notify the reserved forest areas in Morni Hills, latest by December 31.
A division bench of Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sumeet Goel critised the State for not taking any action in the matter, despite the process being initiated four decades ago through a notification dated December 18, 1987.
Title: Ramchander Shukla and another v. Union of India through the General Manager,
Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 261
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has granted a compensation of of Rs.4 lakh along with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of accident till the date of actual realization or Rs.8 lakh “whichever is higher.“
Justice Pankaj Jain said, "once it stands proved that deceased-Gaurav Kumar was holding a valid Monthly Seasonal Ticket (MST) on the given date even though last digit was wrongly mentioned in the claim petition, the Tribunal ought not have held him to be a bona fide passenger. Resultantly, the finding is reversed. The deceased is held to be bona fide passenger, holding a valid MST on the date of accident."