Punjab And Haryana High Court Weekly Round Up : April 18 To April 24,2022

Nominal IndexSunita Devi v. State Of Haryana and Another 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 78 Mohan Lal v. State of Haryana and Others 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 79 Swaran Kaur v. State of Punjab and others 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 80 Rinky Rani v. Daljit Kumar 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 81 Inam v. State Of Haryana 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 82 Yoginder Kumar Sud versus Thakur Rajiv Singh and Another 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 83 Dainik Bhaskar Corporation Limited Versus State of Haryana and others 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 84 Poonam Kalsi v. State Of Punjab And Others 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 85 Judgments/ Orders of the Week 1.Ordinarily, Court Does Not Interfere In Compassionate Appointment Matters Of Contractual Employee In Absence Of Any Policy: Punjab And Haryana High Court Case Title: Sunita Devi v. State Of Haryana and Another Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 78 Punjab and Haryana High Court this court would not have interfered in such a matter of contractual employee in the absence of any policy but in the mitigating circumstances of this case, it is expected from the State to have a compassionate outlook and try to accommodate the petitioner on any suitable post in any class subject to the requirement of services. Justice Arun Monga stated that a decision needs to be taken as expeditiously as possible since the petitioner and her four minor children continue to live in penury. 2. Person Not Being A Complainant Cannot Ask For Addition Of Offences In FIR: Punjab & Haryana High Court Case Title: Mohan Lal v. State of Haryana and Others Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 79 Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that a no-complainant cannot seek directions of addition of particular offences in a FIR lodged by another person. The bench comprising Justice H.S. Madaan stated that petitioner can avail the remedy by approaching the Illaqa Magistrate seeking registration of FIR by way of an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. or by filing a private complaint. Upon which the Magistrate may take appropriate action in accordance with the law. 3.Dependant Parents Entitled To Family Pension After Wife & Children Of Deceased Lose Eligibility: Punjab & Haryana High Court Case Title: Swaran Kaur v. State of Punjab and others Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 80 Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that entitlement for the grant of family pension to the dependent parents needs to be seen after the widow or the children loose their eligibility for the grant of the said benefit. The bench comprising Justice Harsimran Singh Sethi held that the widow initially is entitled to the family pension, after she becomes ineligible the children will be entitled and when children become ineligible, the dependant parents will be granted the same subject to fulfillment of other eligibility criteria. Court further added that the dependent parent's claim for a family pension cannot be ignored only because the deceased is survived by his widow or children. 4. "Court Shouldn't Be Swayed By Emotions Tilting Towards Fairer Sex": PH High Court Rejects Wife's Plea To Transfer Matrimonial Case Case Title: Rinky Rani v. Daljit KumarCitation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 81The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently dismissed a plea filed by a woman who sought transfer of the matrimonial case to her home district as it observed that merely because the applicant is a wife, the Court should not be swayed by emotions tilting toward the fairer sex.Justice Fateh Deep Singh observed that the wife cannot be allowed to take undue benefit of her own wrongs and rather the present petition is nothing but a sweet revenge by the wife to force the husband not to seek his rights under the law and more so the invocation of a jurisdiction under Section 24 of the CPC is not to be rightly inferred unless and until there are bonafide compelling reasons for the Court to come to the aid of the applicant and dismissed the plea. 5. Anticipatory Bail Plea On Behalf Of Proclaimed Offender Not Maintainable: Punjab & Haryana High Court Case Title: Inam v. State Of HaryanaCitation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 82 Punjab and Haryana High Court has reiterated that a person against whom a warrant had been issued and is absconding or concealing himself in order to avoid execution of the warrant and is declared as a proclaimed offender in terms of Section 82 of the Code he is not entitled to the relief of anticipatory bail. 6.Once Suit For Permanent Injunction Stood Decreed, Executing Court Cannot Render Said Decree Nugatory: Punjab And Haryana High Court Case Title: Yoginder Kumar Sud versus Thakur Rajiv Singh and AnotherCitation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 83 Punjab and Haryana High Court held that once a suit for the permanent injunction was decreed the same cannot be declared nugatory by the Executing Court stating that the petitioner ought to file a suit for partition. Justice Alka Sarin added that the Executing Court cannot render a decree nugatory...

Punjab And Haryana High Court Weekly Round Up : April 18 To April 24,2022

Drishti Yadav

Tags