Punjab & Haryana High Court Weekly Round-Up: June 23 - June 30, 2024

Introduction

The Punjab and Haryana High Court's recent decisions from June 23 to June 30, 2024, highlight significant legal precedents and address diverse legal issues ranging from criminal law to civil rights. This summary encapsulates key rulings, reflecting the court's approach to justice and procedural integrity.

NDPS Act Conviction Upheld

In Rajinder Singh @ Bittu v. State of Punjab, the court dismissed an appeal challenging a conviction under the NDPS Act for possession of 25 kg heroin. The court found the police's seizure credible, rejecting claims of false implication. Judges Gurvinder Singh Gill and N.S. Shekhawat emphasized the impracticality of planting such a large quantity of contraband, underscoring the rigorous scrutiny required in narcotics cases.

Educational Rights for Prisoners

The case of Prabal Titus v. State of Punjab and others centered on an imprisoned murder accused allowed to appear for LLM exams. Justice Vikas Bahl acknowledged the prisoner’s academic excellence, arguing that denying exam participation would cause "irreparable loss." This decision highlights the court's commitment to upholding educational rights even for those in incarceration.

Bail Bond Signature Requirements

In Veena Parmar v. State of Punjab, the court clarified that there is no statutory requirement for an accused to sign a bail bond in the presence of a police officer or court. Justice Anoop Chitkara's ruling allowed a 75-year-old cancer patient residing in the USA to send a signed bail bond via post. This judgment underscores flexibility in procedural requirements to accommodate special circumstances.

Compensation for Accidental Death

The court, in Shanti Devi @ Sham Kala v. Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation and another, enhanced compensation for the accidental death of a 3rd-grade student. Justice Archana Puri assessed the notional income of the deceased at Rs. 30,000 per annum, considering the child’s academic potential and inflation. This case reflects the court's sensitivity in calculating compensation for child fatalities.

Second Criminal Revision Petition

In XXX v. XXX, Justice Sumeet Goel stated that while a second criminal revision petition is barred under the Criminal Procedure Code, the High Court can still entertain it under Section 482 CrPC if warranted. This ruling balances statutory mandates with the court’s inherent powers to ensure justice.

Sports Quota and Administrative Arbitrary Action

In Manjraj Singh Chatha v. Panjab Univ. & Ors., the court criticized the Chandigarh Administration for denying a Sports Gradation Certificate to a national-level shooter aspiring to join law school. Justice Sandeep Moudgil deemed the administration's actions unjust and arbitrary, emphasizing fair treatment of sports candidates.

Rotation in Academic Leadership

The court in Dr. Mohanmeet Khosla v. Panjab University, Chandigarh and others interpreted the Panjab University Calendar, mandating that all teachers, regardless of seniority, should have the opportunity to head departments on a rotational basis. This decision promotes egalitarian practices in academic leadership.

Employment Rights

In Sanjeev Kumar v. State of Haryana & Ors, the court ruled that non-availability of posts cannot deny appointment to a candidate wronged by the state's arbitrary actions. The court ordered the state to honor the appointment, reflecting its stance against administrative delay and arbitrariness.

Summoning Power Under Section 319 CrPC

In Mandeep Singh v. State of Punjab and others, the court reiterated that the power to summon under Section 319 CrPC cannot be used merely on the prosecution's belief. The prosecution must provide substantial reasons for including additional accused.

Fundamental Right to Marry

In XXX v. XXX, the court upheld the right to marry as a fundamental right, protecting a couple from familial threats. Justice Kuldeep Tiwari emphasized that no one has the authority to interfere in the marriage preferences of consenting adults, reinforcing personal liberty.

Police Misconduct

The court refused to stay the conviction of a police officer for repeatedly raping a woman from the Scheduled Caste community in XXX v. XXX. The judgment quoted Shakespeare to highlight the gravity of the crime and the importance of maintaining public confidence in justice.

Religious Sentiments and Legal Actions

In Harjinder Singh @ Jinda & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Ors., the court refused to quash a cancellation report in a case against singer Gurdas Maan, accused of offending religious sentiments. The court upheld the provision for punishing deliberate acts intended to outrage religious feelings, ensuring legal actions against such offenses.

Conclusion

The weekly round-up from the Punjab and Haryana High Court demonstrates the judiciary’s commitment to justice, procedural integrity, and the protection of rights across various legal spectrums. These rulings set important precedents for future cases and reinforce the principles of fairness and accountability in the legal system.

Court Practice Community

WhatsApp Group Invite

Join WhatsApp Community