Punjab & Haryana High Court Weekly Round Up: June 6 To June 12, 2022

Nominal Index1.Jaswinder Singh @ Jass VERSUS State of Punjab 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 135 2.Ghanso @ Kalo v. State of Punjab 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 136 3.Rohit @ Mirchi Versus State of Haryana 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 137 4.Kanta Devi and Others versus Paripuran Singh and Others 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 138 5.Phool Singh and Another versus Amit Kumar and Others 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 1396.Rajnandini Metal Ltd. Versus Union Of India 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 1407.Robin Gupta v. MS Stratford Educational Management Pvt Ltd And Others 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 141 Judgments/ Orders of the Week1. NDPS Act | Passing Secret Tip About Illicit Drugs To Gazetted Officer Before Apprehending Accused Not Reason To Doubt Prosecution Story: P&H High Court Case Title: Jaswinder Singh @ Jass VERSUS State of Punjab Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 135 The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently refused to doubt the prosecution's story in a NDPS case, merely on the ground that the alleged secret information on the basis of which the accused was apprehended was shared with a Gazetted officer, even before his apprehension. The bench also held that Section 37 of the Act provides stringent condition for bail in case of recovery of commercial quantity and the custody in itself will not be the only consideration for the grant of regular bail, considering the quantity of recovery.2. Rigors Of S.37 NDPS Act Can Be Relaxed In Cases Involving Commercial Quantity If There Is Delay In Conclusion Of Trial: Punjab & Haryana High Court Ghanso @ Kalo v. State of Punjab Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 136 The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently held that on account of delay in the conclusion of trial, rigors of Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act can be relaxed to an extent and prayer of the accused for bail can be considered despite that she was found in possession of a commercial quantity of contraband. Section 37 bars grant of bail to persons accused of an offence punishable for offences under section 19 or section 24 or section 27A of the Act and also for offences involving commercial quantity.3. Punjab & Haryana High Court Refuses Bail On Ground Of Compromise, Says Complainant May Be Influenced By Co-Accused Who Are Yet To Be Arrested Case Title: Rohit @ Mirchi Versus State of Haryana Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 137 The Punjab and Haryana High Court, while dealing with a petition seeking regular bail of the accused in FIR relating to physical abuse and abduction of complainant's brother, who later committed suicide, held that the compromise cannot be taken as a ground at this stage for grant of bail. The bench comprising Justice Avneesh Jhingan further held that the allegations in the FIR are serious and there are chances of the complainant being influenced because other co-accused are not yet arrested.4. Additional Issues If Necessary Can Be Framed At Any Point Of Time In Trial: Punjab & Haryana High Court Case Title: Kanta Devi and Others versus Paripuran Singh and Others Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 138 The Punjab and Haryana High Court, while dealing with a petition challenging Trial Court's order vide which application by the plaintiff-petitioners for framing an additional issue was dismissed, held that an additional issue can be framed at any point of time during trial. The bench comprising Justice Alka Sarin however, upheld the Trial Court's order stating that the issues already framed are broad enough to cover the entire controversy in issue.5. Unregistered Agreement To Sell Being In Contravention Of Registration Act Can't Be Accepted For Establishing Possession Of Property: P&H High Court Case Title: Phool Singh and Another versus Amit Kumar and Others Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 139 The Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that an unregistered agreement to sell, being in contravention of the provisions of the Registration Act, 1908, cannot be accepted by the Court for granting possession in favour of the claimant party. No documentary evidence was placed on the record to show petitioner's possession. Thus, the Court refused to grant injunction stating that the plaintiff-petitioners have not been able to make out a prima facie case in their favour and neither is the balance of convenience in their favour.6. No Reason To Believe That Input Tax Credit Is Fraudulently Availed: Punjab & Haryana High CourtCase Title: Rajnandini Metal Ltd. Versus Union Of India Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 140The Punjab and Haryana High Court bench of Justices Tejinder Singh Dhindsa and Pankaj Jain has held that there should be reason to believe that the input tax credit available in the Electronic Credit Ledger was obtained fraudulently or that the assesses are ineligible. The relevant officer must record the reasons, and a speaking order must be issued.7. Constitutional Court Not Constrained By Procedural Law Unless There Is Specific Prohibition: ...

Punjab & Haryana High Court Weekly Round Up: June 6 To June 12, 2022

Drishti Yadav

Tags