Punjab & Haryana High Court Monthly Digest: August 2025

Nominal Index [Citations 309 - 353]

Kangana Ranaut v. Mahinder Kaur  2025 LiveLaw (PH) 309

Vikas Tomar @ Vikash Tomar v State of Haryana 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 310

Col. Sukhwinder Singh Dhillon v. State of Punjab  2025 LiveLaw (PH) 311

CHIRAG KUMAR SARDANA v. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 312

Manish Kumar v. Directorate General, Goods & Service Tax Intelligence, Zonal Unit, Ludhiana 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 313

RAVNEET KAUR v. PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT, CHANDIGARH AND ANOTHER. 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 314

Harcharan Singh vs. State of Punjab 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 315

 Payal Chaudhary v. KAP Sinha IAS and others 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 316

Harpreet Kaur v. State of Punjab and Others 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 317

Sikander Singh v. ED 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 318

 AMIT RANA @ MEETA V/S STATE OF HARYANA 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 319

 RANJIT SINGH GILL V/S STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 320

LAKHWINDER SINGH @ LAKHU VS STATE OF PUNJAB 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 321

Sandeep Monga vs. State of Haryana and others Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 322

Gurmeet Singh v. State of Punjab 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 323

Kapil Saini v. State of Haryana & Ors 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 324

AXXX v. XXXX  2025 LiveLaw (PH) 325

 XXXX v. XXXX 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 326

 Vasdev Sinh v. State of Punjab and Others 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 327

THE STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS v. XXX  2025 LiveLaw (PH) 328

TV TODAY NETWORK LIMITED v. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER  2025 LiveLaw (PH) 329

 FEDERATION OF SEED INDUSTRY OF INDIA v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 330

 Naresh v. State of Haryana 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 331

 Dr. Amit Kumar Singal v. Central Bureau of Investigation 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 332

 Dr. Amit Kumar Singal v. Central Bureau of Investigation 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 333

 Bachan Kaur v. Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. and others 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 334

KANWAR NARESH SINGH SODHI v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 335

Rahul Bundela @ Rahul v. State of Haryana and another 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 336

GURNAM SINGH ALIAS GAMA ALIAS GAMMA v. STATE OF PUNJAB 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 337

Tejinder Singh Bhathal and others v. State of Punjab and another 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 338

SONU ALIAS AMAR v. STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 339

 Asif v. State of Haryana 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 340

 AU SMALL FINANCE BANK v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS  2025 LiveLaw (PH) 341

XXXX v. XXXX  2025 LiveLaw (PH) 342

Union of India and others v. Sher Singh and another  2025 LiveLaw (PH) 343

XXXv. XXXX 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 344

 ASI Dilbag Singh v. State of Union Territory, Chandigarh. 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 345

 RANJIT SINGH GILL v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 346

TULSI RAM MISHRA v. S. RADHA CHAUHAN & ANR  2025 LiveLaw (PH) 347

Farida Praveen alias Shikha Gaur v. State of Haryana 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 348

 Seema v. State of Punjab  2025 LiveLaw (PH) 349

 Veerpal Kaur v. State of Punjab and others  2025 LiveLaw (PH) 350

 Jaswinder Singh v. Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd and others.  2025 LiveLaw (PH) 351

 The Union of India and others v. Ex Sep Sham Singh & another: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 352

 XXXXX v. XXXXX 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 353

Reports

Punjab & Haryana High Court Dismisses Kangana Ranaut's Plea Seeking Quashing Of Defamation Case Over Tweet On Farmers' Protest

Justice & Compassion Go Together, Punjab & Haryana High Court Allows Sportsman Accused In Fraud Case To Travel Abroad For Shooting Camp

Punjab & Haryana High Court Imposes ₹10K Cost On Investigating Officer For Not Following HC Order, Directs Recovery Of Amount From Salary

Title: Sandeep Monga vs. State of Haryana and others

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 322

The Punjab and Haryana High Court imposed a cost of ₹10,000 on an Investigating Officer (IO) who failed to follow Court's direction to remain present along with the case diary.

The Court was hearing a protection plea against Police Officers who allegedly withdrawn over Rs. 6.4 lakhs from petitioner's account and arrested him in a cyber crime case, without following the due process. During the last hearing the Court had summoned the IO of the case.

Magistrate/ Sessions Court Competent To Grant Default Bail Even If Regular Bail Plea Pending Before HC : Punjab & Haryana High Court

Title: Gurmeet Singh v. State of Punjab

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 323

In a significant ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has clarified that a Magistrate or the Sessions Court, as the case may be, retains the competence to grant default bail to an accused, even when a regular bail application is pending before a Sessions Court or the High Court.

The development comes while hearing a regular bail plea wherein during the pendency of the application, the accused completed 3 months and default bail was granted by the Magistrate under Section 167(2) CrPC, which corresponds to Section 187(3) BNSS.

Haryana SSC Prima Facie Guilty Of Contempt For Not Conducting Candidates' Biometric Verification: High Court Directs Recall Of Exam Results

Title: Kapil Saini v. State of Haryana & Ors

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 324

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has held the Haryana Staff Selection Commission (HSSC) prima facie guilty of contempt for failing to comply with its order directing the biometric verification of candidates appearing in competitive exams.

Taking serious note of the non-compliance, the Court has asked the Commission to recall the result declared without conducting the mandated verification fir the post of Junior Engineer (Civil)

'Child's Right To Know Parentage Overrides Parent's Right To Privacy': Punjab & Haryana High Court

Title: AXXX v. XXXX

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 325

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has upheld an order mandating a DNA test while emphasizing that a man's right to privacy can't override a child's right to know their biological parentage.

The observation was made while dismissing a petition that challenged a trial court's decision allowing a child's plea for the comparison of his DNA sample with that of the man he claims to be his father. However, the Court modified the order with modification of conducting of the test, but without any compel or assistance of the police.

'Least Expected From Senior Officer': P&H High Court Imposes ₹10K Cost On Inspector General Of Prisons For Denying Parole In 'Casual Manner'

Title: XXXX v. XXXX

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 326

In a strong rebuke to arbitrary administrative actions, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has imposed a cost of Rs.10,000 on an Inspector General of Prisons for rejecting a parole application without proper application of mind

High Court Imposes ₹50K Cost On Punjab Govt For Unjustly Withholding Retiral Benefits Over 14-Year-Old Alleged Incident

Title: Vasdev Sinh v. State of Punjab and Others

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 327

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has imposed a cost of ₹50,000 on the Punjab government for unjustly withholding the retiral benefits of a former employee based on an alleged incident that occurred 14 years prior to his retirement.

It is pertinent to note that the Punjab Civil Services Rules (applicable in this case), forbids initiating disciplinary proceedings after an employee has retired, if the matter pertains to an event that happened over four years before the date of initiating the proceedings.

'Not Informed About Risk Of Failure, Led To Birth Of Sixth Child': P&H High Court Upholds Compensation For Failed Sterilisation

Title: THE STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS v. XXX

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 328

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has upheld a compensation of ₹20,000 awarded to a woman for a failed sterilisation procedure, observing that she had not been informed about the possibility of failure, which ultimately led to the birth of her sixth child.

Justice Harpreet Kaur Jeewan said, “The consent of the respondent-plaintiff (woman) should have been obtained after giving information about the pros and cons of the said operation and this fact should have been clearly informed to the respondent-plaintiff that there are chances of failure of the said operation to the extent of 0.3%.”

Punjab & Haryana High Court Declines To Quash Defamation Case Against Aaj Tak For Allegedly Linking Businessman With BJP Leader's Murder

Title: TV TODAY NETWORK LIMITED v. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 329

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has refused to quash a defamation case filed against news channel Aaj Tak for allegedly linking a businessman Gopal Kumar Goyal, to the murder of a BJP leader and actor, Sonali Phogat in 2022.

The TV Today Network Limited had filed the plea challenging judicial magistrate's order directing the police to register a NCR and subsequently chargesheet filed on Goyal's complaint.

P&H High Court Quashes Punjab Govt's Order To Ban Hybrid Seeds, Upholds Ban On Non-Notified Varieties

Title: FEDERATION OF SEED INDUSTRY OF INDIA v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 330

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has quashed an order issued by the Punjab Government banning the use of hybrid seeds, holding that the state lacked the authority to impose such a prohibition.

However, the Court upheld the administrative order which imposed prohibition only upon the use of those kinds or varieties of hybrid paddy seeds in the State of Punjab which are non-notified varieties.

Junaid Khan Lynching Case | P&H High Court Denies Bail To Prime Accused, Says Eye Witnesses Should Be Given Safe Environment

Title: Naresh v. State of Haryana

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 331

The Punjab and Haryana High Court rejected the bail plea of the prime accused Naresh, the main accused in the case concerning the alleged brutal lynching of a 16-year-old boy, Junaid Khan, in June 2017.

The accused Naresh is charged under Sections 302, 307, 323, 324 and 34 IPC and Section 145 Railway Act. The Court noted that two of the eye witnesses are yet to be examined.

Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Bail To IRS Officer Accused Of Demanding ₹45 Lakh To Settle Income Tax Notice

Title: Dr. Amit Kumar Singal v. Central Bureau of Investigation

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 332

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has granted bail to an Indian Revenue Service (IRS) officer accused of demanding a bribe of ₹45 lakh in exchange for settling an income tax notice, along with a co-accused.

Justice Sumeet Goel noted, "The petitioner was arrested on 01.06.2025 whereinafter investigation in the case has been completed and charge-sheet/challan has been filed by the CBI on 30.07.2025. Total 19 prosecution witnesses have been cited and none has been examined till date. It is, thus, indubitable that the culmination of the trial will take its own time in view of the voluminous evidence and number of witnesses and thus, keeping the petitioner behind the bars for an indefinite period would not serve any substantial purpose once the investigation is complete."

Punjab & Haryana High Court Explains When Accused Can Directly Approach HC For Bail

Title: Dr. Amit Kumar Singal v. Central Bureau of Investigation

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 333

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has explained that an accused person can directly approach the High Court for bail only under "exceptional circumstances."

Justice Sumeet Goel elucidated, "There may be multitude of factors which may result in exceptional circumstance(s) enabling an accused to file, maintain and pursue his regular plea before the High Court straightaway. For instance; the incident/crime involved may have caused tangible circumstances, adverse to the petitioner-accused in approaching the Sessions Court; there may be perceptible difficulty for the petitioner-accused to approach the Sessions Court vis.-a-vis. the High Court; the plea may be involving complicated question(s) of law etc. Needless to say that these factors are merely illustrative in nature and not exhaustive."

'Terribly Apathetic': P&H High Court Reprimands Authorities For Labelling Disability Of Employee Sustained During Service As 'Inefficiency'

Title: Bachan Kaur v. Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. and others

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 334

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has strongly criticized the conduct of Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd (UHBVN) authorities who equated disability sustained by an employee during service with “inefficiency,” calling their approach “terribly apathetic.”

The Court also pulled up officials for asking a widow to prove that her husband had sustained injuries while on duty nearly 40 years ago. 

Judges, Authorities Not Completing Execution Proceeding Within 6 Months As Per SC Judgement Liable To Contempt: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Title: KANWAR NARESH SINGH SODHI v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 335

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has observed that failure of judicial officers and authorities to complete execution proceedings within six months—as mandated by the Supreme Court in Rahul S. Shah vs. Jinendra Kumar Gandhi—"shall be treated as contempt of the said judgment."

The Apex Court in Rahul S. Shah case while issuing directions to reduce delays in the execution proceedings, observed that an Executing Court must dispose of the Execution Proceedings within six months from the date of filing, which may be extended only by recording reasons in writing for such delay.

'Questionable Whether SC/ST Act Applies To Accused Who Himself Belongs To Deprived Scheduled Caste': P&H High Court Grants Bail

Title: Rahul Bundela @ Rahul v. State of Haryana and another

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 336

Granting bail to a man booked under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, the Punjab and Haryana High Court observed that since the accused himself belongs to a deprived Scheduled Caste community, it is questionable whether the provisions of the Act would be applicable in the given circumstances.

Justice Manisha Batra noted, "He was arrested after a gap of 425 days after registration of FIR. A perusal of the contents of FIR reveals that the allegation that the victim was called by the name of his caste have not been specifically attributed to him. Even otherwise, he is falling under Deprived Scheduled Caste category and as such, it is to be considered as to whether the provisions of SC/ST Act are applicable against him or not?."

Inappropriate For A Doctor To Request Jail Authorities To Allow Inmate To Be With His Ailing Mother: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Title: GURNAM SINGH ALIAS GAMA ALIAS GAMMA v. STATE OF PUNJAB

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 337

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that it is inappropriate for a medical officer to recommend that jail authorities allow an inmate to visit his ailing mother.

Justice Sanjay Vashisth said, "Petitioner himself has appended his mother's medical certificate dated 09.07.2025 issued by one Dr. Vikram Bhatia, and it is quite surprising that even the treating doctor himself has requested the jail authorities to allow the petitioner to be his mother's side during the time of her treatment."

Punjab Power Corporation Is Statutory Body, Can Prescribe Cut-Off Date For Implementation Of 5th Pay Commission: P&H High Court

Title: Tejinder Singh Bhathal and others v. State of Punjab and another

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 338

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that the Punjab State Power Corporation Limited (PSPCL), being a statutory body, is well within its rights to prescribe a cut-off date for the implementation of the 5th Pay Commission recommendations.

Justice Harpreet Singh Brar said, "The PSPCL being a statutory corporation is entitled to prescribe a cut-off date for implementation of the recommendations of the Fifth Pay Commission, in view of its financial health. The inability of the Corporation to extend benefits of enhanced pensionary benefits has been demonstrated by relying on cogent material and as such, is not arbitrary in nature."

Furlough Is Not Matter Of Right, Can Be Rejected In Rarest Of Rare Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Title: SONU ALIAS AMAR v. STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 339

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has observed that furlough is not a matter of right and can be denied in the rarest of rare cases.

Furlough and parole envisage a short-term temporary release from custody.

The difference is, while parole is granted for the prisoner to meet a specific exigency, furlough may be granted after a stipulated number of years have been served without any reason as per the relevant policy.

Cows Hold Unique Status In India, Slaughter Can Have Severe Repercussions On Public Peace: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Title: Asif v. State of Haryana

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 340

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has observed that the cow holds a unique and special status in India, noting that its slaughter can have grave repercussions on public peace when it offends the deeply held beliefs of a significant population group.

It was alleged that the petitioner, Aasif, was transporting two cows to Rajasthan for slaughtering, in violation of the Haryana Gauvansh Sanrakshan and Gausamvardhan Act and the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act.

'NPAs Are A Huge Burden On Public Exchequer, DMs Can't Delay Process Under SARFAESI Act': P&H High Court Orders Training For Officers

Title: AU SMALL FINANCE BANK v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 341

Taking serious note of the mounting Non-Performing Assets (NPAs) and their adverse impact on the public exchequer, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has observed that District Magistrates cannot afford to delay on taking and handing possession of secured assets to the creditors under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act).

Offence Under POCSO Act Against Public Morality, Court's Duty To Acts As Child's Guardian: P&H High Court Rejects Pre-Arrest Bail

Title: XXXX v. XXXX

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 342

Reaffirming the seriousness and gravity of offences under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that such crimes strike against public morality.

The Court rejected the anticipatory bail of a man, accused of committing rape on a minor, an offence under Sections 137 (kidnapping), 96 (procuration of child), 3(5) (common intention), 64(1) (rape) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 4 (penetrative sexual assault) of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

'Army Authorities Misrepresented Facts Before Court': P&H HC Objects To Denial Of Regularisation To Personnel Serving For Over 30 Yrs

Title: Union of India and others v. Sher Singh and another

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 343

In a scathing judgment, the Punjab and Haryana High Court criticized the Army authorities for presenting a “sorry state of affairs” by "manipulating facts" to deny regularisation benefits to employees who had rendered over three decades of service.

The Union Government claimed that the post for which regularisation was sought was abolished at the time when the CAT has directed for the same, however the same was not found to be true by the Court.

Married Woman Consenting Sexual Intercourse Outside Wedlock 'Immoral' But Not Rape On False Promise To Marry: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Title: XXXX v. XXXX

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 344

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has set aside the conviction of a man in a rape case filed by a married woman who alleged sexual assault based on a false promise of marriage.

Justice Shalini Singh Nagpal said, “When a fully matured married woman, consents to sexual intercourse on a promise of marriage and continues indulging in such activity, it is merely an act of promiscuity, immorality and reckless disregard of the institution of marriage, not an act of inducement by misconception of fact. Section 90 of IPC cannot be applied in any such case to pardon the act of a woman and the criminal liability on another."

Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pre-Arrest Bail To Judge's Personal Security Officer Who Allegedly Tried To Open Fire On Court Officer

Title: ASI Dilbag Singh v. State of Union Territory, Chandigarh.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 345

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has granted pre-arrest bail to the personal security officer (PSO) of a sitting High Court judge, who allegedly attempted to open fire on a court officer during a heated altercation.

The Chief Court Officer, Dalvinder Singh, filed a complaint stating that during a heated argument, ASI Dilbagh Singh pulled out his gun to open fire, but the bullet was not shot as a result of a failed attempt.

'No Blanket Orders Can Be Passed Directing Service Of Notice Before Arrest': P&H High Court Reject's Former SAD Member Ranjit Gill's Plea

Title: RANJIT SINGH GILL v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 346

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has said that no blanket protection can be granted to an accused, requiring the investigating agency to serve prior notice before arrest, as the same will amount to curtailing its authority against a person alleged to have committed a non-bailable offence.

High Court Imposes ₹50K Cost On Punjab Govt For Seeking Repeated Adjournments In Obtaining Sanction To Prosecute Ex-Chief Secy In Graft Case

Title: TULSI RAM MISHRA v. S. RADHA CHAUHAN & ANR

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 347

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has imposed a cost of ₹50,000 on the Punjab Government for repeatedly seeking adjournments in a contempt petition.

The case pertains to a contempt petition filed by Tulsi Ram Mishra, alleging non-compliance with the order passed in September 2023, directing the state to forward all documents to the Centre for obtaining sanction to prosecute Punjab's former Chief Secretary Vijay Kumar Janjua, within a stipulated period. Janjua was allegedly caught red-handed while accepting illegal gratification of Rs. 2 lakh.

'Cannot Be Kept In Custody For Indefinite Period': P&H High Court Grants Bail To Undocumented Migrant In Fraud Case On Personal Bond Or FD

Title: Farida Praveen alias Shikha Gaur v. State of Haryana

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 348

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has granted bail to an undocumented female migrant accused in a fraud case, allowing her release on the condition of furnishing bail bond to maximum amount of ₹10,000 in the form of fixed deposit or on personal bond if she fails to arrange surety within 7 days.

It was alleged that Farida Praveen is an illegal migrant and prepared Aadhar Card, Voter Id and PAN Card on the basis of fake documents and also changed her name as Shikha Gaur. Hence, the FIR was registered under 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and Section 14-A of the Foreigners Act 1946.

Cross Border Smuggling On Rise: P&H High Court Calls For Coordination With MEA In NDPS Cases Involving Foreign Nationals

Title: Seema v. State of Punjab

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 349

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has recommended that investigating agencies share the gist of their findings against foreign nationals accused under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act involving significant drug quantity, with the Ministry of External Affairs.

The bench noted that, "the Court's dockets have ever-increasing cases under the NDPS Act, 1985, and these days, the trend of heroin being smuggled by the Indian Drugs Mafia from Pakistan's border is also more noticeable."

Habeas Corpus Plea Not Substitute To Custody Proceeding Available Under Guardianship Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Title: Veerpal Kaur v. State of Punjab and others

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 350

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has observed that a habeas corpus petition cannot serve as a substitute for custody proceedings under the guardianship laws like Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act. It clarified that High Court can intervene only when it is clear case of illegality.

Employee Who Acquired Disability During Service Can Be Promoted Under Physically Handicapped Quota: P&H High Court

Title: Jaswinder Singh v. Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd and others.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 351

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that an employee who acquires a disability during the course of service is entitled to be considered for promotion under the physically handicapped (PH) quota.

The petitioner's promotion under the PH category was denied by the State authority on the grounds that he had acquired the disability during his service and not at the time of appointment.

Punjab & Haryana High Court Condemns Centre For Denying Disability Benefit To Soldier Injured During Explosion In 1971 Indo-Pak War

Title: The Union of India and others v. Ex Sep Sham Singh & another

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 352

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has criticized the Central Government for denying disability benefits to a soldier who sustained serious injuries during an explosion in the 1971 Indo-Pak war.

The Court rejected the Union Government's petition challenging Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT)'s order whereby the deceased soldier's wife was granted pensionary benefits.

Right To Legible Medical Prescription Is A Fundamental Right: P&H High Court Directs Doctors To Write In Capital Letters

Title: XXXXX v. XXXXX

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 353

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has said that the right to receive a legible medical prescription is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution. Emphasizing the critical role clear prescriptions play in safeguarding patient health and ensuring proper medical treatment, the Court directed the States to comply with an advisory whereby doctors were directed to write prescriptions in capital letters until a comprehensive system of digital prescriptions is implemented.