- Home
- /
- High Courts
- /
- Punjab and Haryana High Court
- /
- Punjab & Haryana High Court Weekly...
Punjab & Haryana High Court Weekly Round-Up: November 10- November 16, 2025
LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK
20 Nov 2025 9:00 AM IST
Nominal IndexInderjeet Suhag and another v. State of Haryana and others 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 429 XXXXX VS STATE OF U.T. CHANDIGARH 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 430Nishi and Another v. Panjab University and Others 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 431Suresh Jindal v. Punjab State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd and Another 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 432NAVNEET KUMAR V/S UNION TERRITORY OF THE CHANDIGARH AND OTHERS 2025 LiveLaw...
Nominal Index
Inderjeet Suhag and another v. State of Haryana and others 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 429
XXXXX VS STATE OF U.T. CHANDIGARH 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 430
Nishi and Another v. Panjab University and Others 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 431
Suresh Jindal v. Punjab State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd and Another 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 432
NAVNEET KUMAR V/S UNION TERRITORY OF THE CHANDIGARH AND OTHERS 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 433
Anuj Agarwal v. Serious Fraud Investigation Officer 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 434
Amit Tanwar v. State of Haryana 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 435
Badri Mandal & others v. State of Haryana and another 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 436
Kanchanpreet Kaur v. State of Punjab and others 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 437
Sukhchain Masih @ Lalla v. State of Punjab 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 438
Reports
Title: Inderjeet Suhag and another v. State of Haryana and others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 429
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has said that offences committed against public servants in the discharge of their official duties cannot be treated as mere private disputes, in such cases FIR cannot be quashed on the basis of compromise between the parties.
While dismissing the plea for quashing FIR filed by the accused in view of compromise with the complainant-Public Servant, the Court directed the Administrative Secretary of the Department [wherein the FIR-complainant-victims were serving at the time of alleged commission of offence(s)] to look into the matter regarding settlement entered into by them sans requisite administrative permission & take appropriate action.
Title: XXXXX VS STATE OF U.T. CHANDIGARH [CRM-48642-2024 in CRA-S-3761-2024]
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 430
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has suspended the sentence of a school teacher convicted for sexual harassment under Section 354-A IPC and Sections 10 & 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, during the pendency of his appeal.
Justice Namit Kumar noted, "any child who would have experienced such an incident must have been mentally traumatised for a while, whereas, on 03.11.2022 the very next day of the alleged incident, the victim had attended the P.T.M. along with her parents and she also clicked some photographs in the school and uploaded the same on social media through her Instagram account with the caption "School Mein Maje"."
Title: Nishi and Another v. Panjab University and Others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 431
Coming down heavily on the prolonged practice of engaging employees on contractual terms, the Punjab & Haryana High Court has held that the State cannot make contractual appointments for infinity on minimum salary, nor can it take advantage of mass unemployment to exploit its citizens.
The observation was made while directing the Panjab University to regularise contractual Assistant Professors working on ad-hoc basis since 2012.
Title: Suresh Jindal v. Punjab State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd and Another
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 432
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that once the relationship of employer and employee has been conclusively severed by way of dismissal, the employer becomes functus officio and loses the jurisdiction to initiate or continue disciplinary proceedings against the dismissed employee.
Justice Harpreet Singh Brar said, "The foundational axiom governing disciplinary jurisdiction is the indispensable requirement of a subsisting jural relationship of master and servant, or employer and employee. This jurisdiction is inherently contingent upon the employee's active status within the organization."
Title: NAVNEET KUMAR V/S UNION TERRITORY OF THE CHANDIGARH AND OTHERS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 433
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has dismissed the petition seeking transfer of the investigation into the suicide of IPS officer Y Puran Kumar to an independent agency, observing that there was no ground to doubt the ongoing probe by the Chandigarh Police.
Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sanjiv Berry noted, “ The learned Senior counsel representing UT Chandigarh Amit Jhanji has apprised that 14 persons are arrayed as accused in the said FIR and and pursuant to the lodging of aforesaid FIR, statements of 22 witnesses have been recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. [equivalent to Section 180 of BNSS] and certain items seized, have been sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory, Chandigarh and Phillaur, District Jalandhar, but reports thereof are awaited. Learned senior counsel has also informed that on 10.10.2025, a Special Investigation Team (SIT) headed by the Inspector General of Police, UT Chandigarh has been constituted, which is looking after the investigation.”
Title: Anuj Agarwal v. Serious Fraud Investigation Officer
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 434
The Punjab & Haryana High Court recently granted anticipatory bail to a group of Chartered Accountants accused by the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) in connection with the alleged ₹1,596.94 crore fraud by the SRS Group of Companies. The Court, by a common order, disposed of multiple pending bail applications of eight Chartered Accountants by classifying them into two categories — Statutory Auditors and Internal Auditors.
Title: Amit Tanwar v. State of Haryana
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 435
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has observed that keeping seized vehicles in police custody for years serves no useful purpose and results in depreciation, decay, and environmental harm. The Court underscored that modern technology allows for digital documentation — including video and photographs — to serve as sufficient evidence, thereby enabling timely release of vehicles to their rightful owners.
Title: Badri Mandal & others v. State of Haryana and another
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 436
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has observed that cyber fraud constitutes a systemic offence against public trust and the digital economy, and therefore, such cases cannot be quashed merely on the basis of a compromise or settlement between the complainant and the accused.
Justice Sumeet Goel said, "The contemporary felony of cyber fraud presents a transgression sui generis that mandates its categorical exclusion from the judicial indulgence for quashing of criminal proceedings solely on the basis of a compromise/settlement having been arrived at between the complainant/victim and the accused. Digital economy is the unassailable locus of modern commerce, sustained entirely by the bedrock of public trust."
P&H High Court Dismisses SAD Candidate's Plea For 'Blanket' Anticipatory Bail
Title: Kanchanpreet Kaur v. State of Punjab and others
Citation:2025 LiveLaw (PH) 437
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has dismissed a petition filed by Kanchanpreet Kaur, daughter of Sukhwinder Kaur Randhawa, the Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) candidate for the upcoming Tarn Taran Assembly by-election, seeking anticipatory or blanket bail on the apprehension that she may be implicated in false criminal cases due to political vendetta.
Justice Rupinderjit Chahal said, "directing the respondent to serve seven days prior notice before arrest would virtually amount to granting a blanket protection from arrest in guise of anticipatory bail which is contrary to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as discussed above."
Title: Sukhchain Masih @ Lalla v. State of Punjab
Citation:2025 LiveLaw (PH) 438
Reasserting that currency issued by the sovereign cannot be labelled “drug money” without substantive proof, the Punjab & Haryana High Court has held that the burden squarely rests on the investigating agency to establish a specific and demonstrable nexus between seized cash and illicit drug trafficking before invoking Section 27A or the forfeiture provisions of the NDPS Act.
Section 27A NDPS Act is a provision that penalizes individuals involved in financing illicit drug trafficking or harboring offenders.
Other Developments
Punjab & Haryana Bar Council Exonerates Lawyers Accused In High Court 'Bench Hunting' Allegations
The Privilege Committee of the Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana has exonerated all the lawyers and other individuals to whom it had earlier issued notices in connection with bench hunting allegations at the Punjab and Haryana High Court.
The State Bar Council had launched an inquiry into serious allegations of bench hunting by lawyers at the Punjab and Haryana High Court
Title: X v. State of Haryana
The Punjab & Haryana High Court rapped Haryana's Child Welfare Officers for acting in “complete deviation from the objectives” of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, their actions exposed a 17-year-old girl to potential danger despite her being declared a child in need of care and protection.
The habeas corpus plea earlier that month after which she was sent to protective custody, but the authorities subsequently handed her over to her uncle “without her consent”, prompting her to flee again.
Case: NFIW v. State of Haryana & Ors.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Tuesday sought a response from the Haryana Government on a petition alleging cow vigilantism by a private individual purportedly acting under the provisions of the Haryana Gauvansh Sanrakshan and Gausamvardhan Act, 2015.
Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sanjiv Berry were hearing the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by the National Federation of Indian Women (NFIW) and issued notice to the Haryana Government.
Title: COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION V/S STATE OF HARYANA THROUGH ITS CHIEF SECY., HARYANA CIVIL
Taking serious note of the death of a child at an unregistered play school in Haryana, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has sought a detailed report from the State Government regarding the safety norms applicable to such institutions.
The Court has also directed the State to disclose the name and designation of the officer responsible for ensuring compliance with regulations governing play schools.