- Home
- /
- High Courts
- /
- Punjab and Haryana High Court
- /
- Punjab & Haryana High Court Monthly...
Punjab & Haryana High Court Monthly Digest: February 2025
Aiman J. Chishti
15 April 2025 9:15 AM IST
Nominal Index [Citations 45 - 98]Sikandar Singh v. Directorate of Enforcement 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 45Samarveer Singh v. State of Punjab and others 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 46Dilbagh Singh v. State of Punjab 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 47Suresh Kumar v. State of Haryana and others 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 48Samarveer Singh v. State of Punjab and others 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 49CBI v. State of Haryana along with connected...
Nominal Index [Citations 45 - 98]
Sikandar Singh v. Directorate of Enforcement 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 45
Samarveer Singh v. State of Punjab and others 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 46
Dilbagh Singh v. State of Punjab 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 47
Suresh Kumar v. State of Haryana and others 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 48
Samarveer Singh v. State of Punjab and others 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 49
CBI v. State of Haryana along with connected matter 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 50
Sanjeev Kumar v. State of Haryana and others 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 51
United India Insurance Co. Ltd v. Gurjinder Kaur and others [along with other petitions] 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 52
Pawan Kharbanda v. State of Punjab and another 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 53
Pawan Kharbanda v. State of Punjab and another 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 54
Jaibuna @ Jai Bhuna v. State of Haryana 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 55
Jaiveer Yadav and others v. State of Haryana 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 56
Sudhir Jiwan v. High Court of Punjab & Haryana and another 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 57
Pritpal Singh Grewal v. Gurlal Singh Grewal 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 58
Subhash Chander Dutt v. State of Haryana 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 59
Subhash Chander Dutt v. State of Haryana 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 60
MOHAN LAL v. UT OF CHANDIGARH AND ORS 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 61
RENU SHARMA AND ORS v. HARYANA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 62
RAMAN @ SONU v. STATE OF PUNJAB 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 63
Aaditya Sharma v. State of Punjab 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 64
Amandeep Singh v. Preet Industries and Anr 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 65
Dhanna Ram v. State of Haryana 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 66
Ravisan and others v. State of Punjab and others [along with other pleas] 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 67
Kumar Pal and others v. Union of India and others 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 68
YATENDER PAL v. STATE OF HARYANA 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 69
Punjab & Sind Bank and another v. Surinder Kumar Verma 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 70
M/S RAMPRASTHA DEVELOPERS PVT LTD AND ORS v. STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 71
AVTAR SINGH PANNU v. STATE OF PUNJAB 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 72
DLF CITY RESIDENTS WELFARE ASSOCIATION AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF HARYNA AND OTHERS 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 73
Union of India and another v. Sukhpreet Kaur and another 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 74
Gagandeep @ Monti v. Sukhbir Singh and others 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 75
MANJINDERSINGH @MANJINDERMAKHA VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 76
Naveen and others v. State of Haryana and others 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 77
Kanwar Pahul Singh v UOI 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 78
Bhola @ Ram Dass v. State of Haryana 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 79
DINESH KUMAR & ORS VS STATE OF HARYANA & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 80
Central Bureau of Investigation v. Ravinder Singh @ Ravinder Singh Bhasin and others Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 81
Rajender Singh v. State Of Haryana 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 82
ISHWAR SINGH AND OTHERS. v. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 83
Balvir Singh @ Dhira v. State of Punjab & others 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 84
Deepak and others v. State of Haryana and others 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 85
Jasmeen Kaur v. State of Punjab and others 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 86
Ravinder v. State of Haryana 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 87
XXX v. XXX 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 88
Atanu Chaudhary v. State of Punjab 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 89
Rahul Rajput v. Food Corporation of India 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 90
VIJAY KUMAR VS STATE OF PUNJAB 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 91
Maharishi Markandeshwar Developers Private Ltd v.State of Haryana and others 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 92
Pawan Kumar v. State of Haryana and others 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 93
Pritpal Singh v. State of Punjab and others 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 94
Rajpal & Ors. v. District Bar Association Hisar & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 95
LORD SHIVA THE DEITY PRACHIN SHIV MANDIR v. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 96
Rajinder Pal Singh Dhaliwal v. General Public and others 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 97
Daulat Ram Bhatti v. State of Punjab [along with connected matters] 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 98
Reports
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.