LiveLaw Punjab & Haryana High Court Weekly Round-Up: June 29 - July 05, 2026
Nominal Index [Citations 211 - 218]Fatima Maqsood v. Indian Institute of Technology, Ropar 2026 LiveLaw (PH) 211Jagwinder Singh @ Joginder Singh v. Ramandeep Khimareet Kaur and others 2026 LiveLaw (PH) 212Vijay Kumar @ Sabu Pandit v. State of Punjab 2026 LiveLaw (PH) 213 XXX v XXX 2026 LiveLaw (PH) 214Sunder Shyam Arora v. State of Punjab 2026 LiveLaw (PH) 215RATTANDEEP SINGH DHALIWAL V/S...
Nominal Index [Citations 211 - 218]
Fatima Maqsood v. Indian Institute of Technology, Ropar 2026 LiveLaw (PH) 211
Jagwinder Singh @ Joginder Singh v. Ramandeep Khimareet Kaur and others 2026 LiveLaw (PH) 212
Vijay Kumar @ Sabu Pandit v. State of Punjab 2026 LiveLaw (PH) 213
XXX v XXX 2026 LiveLaw (PH) 214
Sunder Shyam Arora v. State of Punjab 2026 LiveLaw (PH) 215
RATTANDEEP SINGH DHALIWAL V/S STATE OF PUNJAB 2026 LiveLaw (PH) 216
The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Union of India 2026 LiveLaw (PH) 217
Ranjanni Gaur v. State of Punjab and another 2026 LiveLaw (PH) 218
Reports
Title: Fatima Maqsood v. Indian Institute of Technology, Ropar
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (PH) 211
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has directed the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Ropar to allow a PhD scholar to resume her studies, holding that her resignation was not voluntary but tendered under compelling circumstances arising from alleged harassment by faculty members.
Justice Kuldeep Tiwari said, "this Court has no hesitation to declare that the resignation was not voluntary, rather, it was under the compelling circumstances, as explained above. Therefore, the petitioner has all right to get her such resignation withdrawn. The request of the petitioner for withdrawal of her resignation, ought to have been accepted, which was neither considered, rather kept pending for about three months, propelling the petitioner to approach this Court."
Title: Jagwinder Singh @ Joginder Singh v. Ramandeep Khimareet Kaur and others
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (PH) 212
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has dismissed a regular second appeal filed by a defendant challenging concurrent findings of two courts which had declared a Will as forged and decreed a suit for declaration, possession, and permanent injunction raising suspicion over making of will by 32-year-old man.
Justice Vikram Aggarwal noted, "the age of Gursewak Singh at the time of execution of the Will was about 32 years. This in itself is a suspicious circumstance because normally, a 32 years old person would not make a will. Even if this fact is ignored, it was stated in the Will that defendant No.2 had been serving him. Defendant No.2 was about 04 years old at the time of execution of the alleged Will, having born on 19.08.1979. It is not understood as to what kind of service a four year old child must have been providing to Gursewak Singh, who, out of love and affection, executed the Will in favour of defendant No.2 Jagwinder Singh."
Case title: Vijay Kumar @ Sabu Pandit v. State of Punjab
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (PH) 213.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has granted anticipatory bail in an abetment to suicide case lodged against the father of a man accused of having illicit relationship with the deceased's wife, observing that 3 months time was sufficient for the deceased husband to recover from the shock that his wife was in an illicit relationship. [2026 LiveLaw (PH) 213].
Justice Sandeep Moudgil noted, "There is a gap of almost three months between the alleged discovery of the illicit relationship and the death of the deceased, which provides sufficient and reasonable time for a person to recover from the initial shock arising out of such information."Other Developments
Title: XXX v XXX
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (PH) 214
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has granted regular bail to a music director accused of rape and other offences, observing that the parties were in a live-in relationship and that the allegations pertain to a period prior to the registration of the FIR after their relationship turned sour.
The Bench of Justice Vikram Aggarwal noted that, “petitioner and the complainant were in a live-in-relationship. They were also engaged on 06.08.2025. Both are majors. The allegations of rape and other unnatural offences pertain to a period much prior to the registration of the FIR. It appears that on account of relations having gone sour, the FIR was got registered.”
Title: Sunder Shyam Arora v. State of Punjab.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 215
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has refused to order a fresh investigation in a corruption case against a former Punjab minister Sunder Sham Arora accused of offering a ₹1 crore bribe to Assistant Inspector General (AIG). [2025 LiveLaw (PH) 215]
Arora was allegedly caught red-handed with Rs.50 lakh cash in a trap by Vigilance in presence of witnesses.
Title: RATTANDEEP SINGH DHALIWAL V/S STATE OF PUNJAB
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 216
The Punjab & Haryana High Court on Thursday (July 2) refused to grant relief to journalist and YouTuber Rattandeep Singh Dhaliwal challenging multiple complaints lodged against him by AAP MLAs.
On May 21, Dhaliwal in his podcast said that about 32 sitting MLAs might not be considered as party candidates for the upcoming Punjab assembly elections. Following this, various MLAs filed police complaints against him and various notices were issued to him by the police of different districts in Punjab.
Title: The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Union of India
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 217
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has dismissed an appeal filed by The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. challenging the rejection of its compensation claim by the Railway Claims Tribunal in a case involving shortage of goods in a cross-border consignment from Pakistan in 1990.
Justice Pankaj Jain said, "where the goods are being carried from a place outside India to a place in India by the railway, the administration can be held responsible under the provisions of Chapter VII of 1890 Act for loss, destruction, damage or deterioration of goods only if it is proved by the owner of the goods that such loss, destruction, damage or deterioration arose on the railway of the railway administration."
Title: Ranjanni Gaur v. State of Punjab and another
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 218
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has quashed an FIR registered against a woman for allegedly hurting religious sentiments by dressing up her pet dog as Lord Krishna and posting its images on WhatsApp, holding that the essential ingredients of the offence under Section 298 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) were not made out.
Section 298 criminalizes injuring or defiling place of worship, with intent to insult the religion of any class.
Other Developments
Title: Jasbir Singh v State of Punjab & Ors.
The Punjab & Haryana High Court today asked the Municipal Corporation of Ludhiana to “forthwith” examine the allegations of encroachment on footpaths, taking note of Supreme Court's recent ruling in Manihar Iliyaz Shaik v P.Ayyapan.
For context, the Supreme Court in Manihar case has held that the right to walk on a demarcated footpath is a fundamental right under Article 19(1)(d) of the Constitution, which includes the right to access safe and well-demarcated footpaths. This right shall have priority over movement by motorised vehicles.
Title: Kanwar Pahul Singh v State of Punjab
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has sought a status report from Punjab authorities, detailing the steps taken to ensure fire safety in coaching centres and educational institutions, in the wake of a tragic fire incident in Lucknow that claimed 18 lives.
A Division Bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Rohit Kapoor while hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) raising concerns over fire safety violations in coaching centres said, “what has happened is worrisome.”