Court grants relief where the procedural safeguards under Section 82 CrPC were not followed and absence was not wilful; reaffirms that all cumulative requirements of proclamation are mandatory. This judgment upholds and applies prior precedent and is binding on subordinate courts within Punjab and Haryana. Summary Category Data Case Name CRM-M/48854/2025 of RAM CHANDER […]
A writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking to quash an appointment order that is subsequently withdrawn during proceedings, is rendered infructuous and liable to be dismissed as withdrawn. The court reaffirms the principle that writ petitions do not survive once the impugned action is undone; this upholds existing precedent and […]
The Court held that when only a non-commercial quantity of contraband is recovered from a co-accused, and an accused is involved solely on the basis of a co-accused’s disclosure statement, regular bail may be granted; Section 37 of the NDPS Act does not bar bail in such circumstances. This judgment reaffirms established principles of bail […]
Bail may be granted under the NDPS Act when the accused faces prolonged custody, there is no recovery of contraband from their person, and delay in trial is not attributable to the accused—this judgment upholds existing law and sets binding precedent for courts within Punjab and Haryana, especially in cases involving similar factual circumstances. […]
The High Court reaffirmed that when a non-bailable warrant is issued solely due to an accused’s non-appearance and the accused subsequently appears and joins proceedings, quashing or recalling such warrants lies within the court’s discretion. The decision clarifies application of interim bail under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, and stands as […]
The High Court reiterates that individuals engaged voluntarily, paid solely on outcome/productivity basis without an employer-employee relationship, cannot seek regularization as government employees. The judgment affirms existing precedent and solidifies its applicability for public sector voluntary engagements, providing binding authority within Punjab and Haryana. Summary Category Data Case Name LPA/1694/2025 of JAGDEV SINGH AND […]
The High Court reaffirmed that, in light of Section 145 of the Electricity Act, 2003 and established Division Bench precedent, civil courts do not have jurisdiction to entertain suits relating to matters covered by the Act. This binding judgment upholds and applies existing precedent, specifically impacting electricity-related legal disputes and guiding future litigation strategy. […]
The Punjab and Haryana High Court reiterated that anticipatory bail is not warranted in cases with grave and specific allegations of aggravated penetrative sexual assault under the POCSO Act, irrespective of claimed evidence of innocence—reinforcing existing precedent and clarifying that such orders are binding within the High Court’s jurisdiction. Summary Category Data Case Name […]
Court holds that the right to a hearing under natural justice may not arise where foundational eligibility criteria are objectively unmet; reaffirms existing Supreme Court precedents that natural justice is not a universal right in all administrative or quasi-judicial actions concerning tenders. Judgment is binding within the State’s jurisdiction and carries persuasive value elsewhere for […]
The High Court of Delhi held that if the parties to a matrimonial dispute under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC have fully and voluntarily settled their disputes, with the complainant affirming receipt of full settlement and expressing no desire to continue prosecution, it is in the interest of justice to quash the criminal proceedings. This decision continues […]
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has reaffirmed that the requirements of Section 82(2) CrPC must be mandatorily and cumulatively fulfilled before declaring a person a proclaimed offender, clarifying that absence must not automatically be treated as “wilful” or “deliberate” if justified. The judgment follows and applies existing precedent and serves as binding authority within […]
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has upheld that “war injury” under Category E(i) includes diseases contracted during operational area postings which lead to invalidation from service, and that differentiation between disease and injury for denial of war injury pension is impermissible. This judgment affirms existing interpretation and strengthens benefit protection for armed forces personnel […]