Punjab & Haryana High Court Weekly Round-Up [May 12 - May 18, 2025]

Nominal Index [Citations 206 - 219]

Union Territory, Chandigarh and others v. Sakshi Malik and others 2025 (PH) 206

 RXXXXX v. XXXX 2025 (PH) 207

Tushar Tanwar v. Bar Council of India 2025 (PH) 208

Jatinder Singh v. State of Haryana 2025 (PH) 209

 Vinod Kumar v. State of Haryana and others 2025 (PH) 210

Jaswinder Singh v. State of Punjab 2025 (PH) 211

Ashok Kumar Sharma v. State of Punjab LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 212

Keval Singh @ KV Dillon v. State of Punjab LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 213

Ashok Kumar Sharma v. State of Punjab LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 214

 Amandeep Singh @ Aman v. State of Punjab LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 215

PXXXXX v. State of Haryana and others LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 216

 Harsimran Kaur v. State of Punjab and others LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 217

Virender Kumar and others v. State of Haryana and others [with connected matters] LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 218

Inspector Prithvi Singh v. State of Haryana and others LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 219

Reports 

Right To Education Act | Diploma Or Bachelor's In Elementary Education Essential For Junior Teacher Post: Punjab & Haryana HC

Title: Union Territory, Chandigarh and others v. Sakshi Malik and others

Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 206

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.

Guardian & Wards Act | Child's 'Ordinary Residence' For Court's Jurisdiction Need Not Be Permanent Residence, It's A Question Of Fact: P&H HC

Title: RXXXXX v. XXXX

Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 207

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."

'Can't Help If You Don't Challenge Exam Rules': Punjab & Haryana High Court On Plea Against BCI Charging Fees For AIBE

Title: Tushar Tanwar v. Bar Council of India

Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 208

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has asked the petitioner challenging the fees charged by Bar Council of India for All India Bar Examination (AIBE) to challenge the Examination rule to enable the Court to look into the grievances.

Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sumeet Goel referring to Section 24 of the Advocates Act said the person can be admitted as advocates on a State roll, "subject to the provisions of the Act, and the rules made thereunder, a person shall be qualified to be admitted as an advocate on a State roll...this is all subject to rules, you challenge the rules...if you don't challenge the examination rules, how can we help then?."

'Draconian': Punjab & Haryana High Court Slams Practice Of Opposing Bail When Accused Refuses To Testify Against Himself

Title: Jatinder Singh v. State of Haryana

Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 209

"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.

Person Involved In Minor Offences Should Not Be Deprived Of Appointment In State Services: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Title: Vinod Kumar v. State of Haryana and others

Citation:LiveLaw  2025 (PH) 210

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.

Demanding Bribe Erodes Public Faith In Govt: P&H High Court Denies Pre-Arrest Bail To Officer Accused Of Asking ₹1K For Signing File

Title: Jaswinder Singh v. State of Punjab

Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 211

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.

Arbitrary Termination Of MoU With Company By Govt Violates Fundamental Right To Trade: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Title: M/S SIEL INDUSTRIAL ESTATE LTD. VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 212

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."

CBFC Ensures Freedom Of Expression, Guarantees That Movie Is Fit For Public: P&H High Court Quashes FIR Against Producer Of 'Shooter' Film

Title: Keval Singh @ KV Dillon v. State of Punjab

Citation:LiveLaw  2025 (PH) 213

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.

'Failed To Supply Grounds Of Arrest, Record Reasons For Search': Punjab & Haryana High Court Declares Arrest 'Illegal' In NDPS Case

Ashok Kumar Sharma v. State of Punjab

Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 214

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.

"Desperation To Look Attractive": P&H High Court Denies Pre-Arrest Bail To Influencer Whose Hair-Growth Oil Caused Adverse Reaction

Title: Amandeep Singh @ Aman v. State of Punjab

Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 215

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."

POCSO FIR Can't Be Quashed Merely Because Victim After Attaining Majority Entered Into Compromise With Accused: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Title: PXXXXX v. State of Haryana and others

Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 216

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.

'Should Not Suffer Due To Judicial Delay': P&H High Court Regularizes BDS Student's Admission Who Finished Course While Plea Was Pending

Title: Harsimran Kaur v. State of Punjab and others

Citation: LiveLaw 2025 (PH) 217

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."

'Court Should Not Judge Standard Of Degrees': Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds State Varsity's Part-Time B.Tech Degree

Case Title: Virender Kumar and others v. State of Haryana and others [with connected matters]

Citation:LiveLaw  2025 (PH) 218

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.

DGP Can Review Disciplinary Action Exonerating Officer Within Reasonable Time When No Time Period Prescribed Under Punjab Police Rules: High Court

Title: Inspector Prithvi Singh v. State of Haryana and others

Citation:LiveLaw  2025 (PH) 219

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that the Director General of Police (DGP) is empowered to review disciplinary proceedings, including orders exonerating police officers, within a reasonable period, even if no specific time frame is prescribed under the Punjab Police Rules.

Other Development

Punjab Jail Security | High Court Calls For Urgent Proposals On Prison Safety Measures, Seeks Chief Secy's Affidavit

Title: COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has directed the Punjab Government to make immediate efforts to submit a proposal for the installation of security equipment and to take measures to strengthen security in Punjab jails.

Justice Anupinder Singh Grewal and Justice Deepak Manchanda noted that as per Punjab's Chief Secretary response, the security equipment has been procured and is being installed in the jails.

Punjab Govt Moves High Court To Recall Order Directing It To Abide By Centre's Decision For Giving Extra Share Of Water To Haryana

The Punjab Government has moved an application before the Punjab & Haryana High Court to recall its 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.

Bhakra Nangal Dam: High Court Seeks Response On Punjab Govt's Plea To Recall Order For Release Of 'Extra Water' To Haryana

Case Title: Bhakra Beas Management Board v. Versus State of Punjab and others

The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Wednesday (May 14) sought response from the Bhakra Beas Management Board (BBMB) on Punjab Government's application seeking recall of Court's May 06 order, which paved way for release of 'extra water' from Bhakra Nangal Dam to Haryana.

A bench of Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sumeet Goel asked BBMB, Haryana Government and the Union government to file a response and kept it for hearing on May 20, alongside the contempt case initiated against Punjab government in this matter.

Medical Infra Doesn't Appear To Be Improving: High Court Seeks Punjab Govt's Reply On Alleged Deficiencies In Malerkotla's Govt Hospital

Title: BHISHAM KINGER V/S STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has taken serious note of the allegedly deteriorating medical infrastructure in Punjab, especially Malerkotla district.

Amidst allegation of inadequate facilities, staff shortages, and lack of specialist doctors in the Government maintained hospitals in Malerkotla, the court has sought a detailed affidavit from the state's Health Department Principal Secretary.