Punjab & Haryana High Court to Government: State Reason for Reinstating Officials with Criminal Cases Filed against Them

Must Read

Kerala High Court Rejects Writ Petition for Rejection of Loan Application

Case: Anvardeen. K v. Union of India. Coram: Justice P.V. Asha On 24th November 2020, The Kerala High Court involving a...

Supreme Court: Maritime Board Must Not Wallow in Inaction and Be Arbitrary in Its Contractual Duties

A Division Bench of the Supreme Court held that a State instrumentality such as the Maritime Board is expected...

Supreme Court: Right to Property Is a Constitutional Right, the Essence of Rule of Law Protects It

A Division Bench of the Supreme Court has held that permitting the State to assert indefinite right upon one’s...

Madras High Court Directs Tahsildar To Issue Origin Certificates To Two Sisters in Two Writ Petitions

Two Writ Petitions by two siblings was filed under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution. The petitions owed to...

Delhi High Court Directs Centre and Delhi Govt To Consider a PIL Seeking Paid Menstrual Leave as Representation

The Delhi High Court had provided direction to consider a petition as representation. The Central and Delhi governments were...

Follow us

 

In the case of Surjit Singh v State of Punjab and Others, Mr. Justice Anupinder Singh Grewal, ordered Addl. Chief Secretary, Department of Home Affairs and Justice, Punjab, to set out all details of FIRs registered against the serving police officers of all rank, by filing an affidavit against whom a criminal case is filed and what is the rationale in allowing the continuance of service such police officers/officials. 

Facts of the case

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner is dismissed from service upon a FIR, filed against him. Still, there are many officials in the State of Punjab who is continuing their services despite the registration of criminal cases against them.

Counsels’ Submission

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the Court has already ordered on  3.09.2020 and directed respondent no.1 to set out all details of FIRs registered against the serving police officers of all rank, by filing an affidavit.

Current postings were also to be mentioned in the affidavit. So, it was filed on 8.10.2020 where details of 1326 officials were mentioned, who are facing criminal cases against them. 

Learned Counsel for the petitioner also filed replication of the same affidavit everything sought by order dated 03.09.2020, which had not been followed, there were several other officials, facing criminal cases and still continuing their service, even after their convictions.

Courts’ Order

The Court observed submission by counsel for the petitioner, previous order by this court on 3.09.2020, and affidavit file on 8.10.2020.

The Court ordered Addl. Chief Secretary, Department of Home Affairs and Justice, Punjab, to set out all details of FIRs registered against the serving police officers of all rank, by filing an affidavit before the next hearing i.e. on 16.11.2020.

The said affidavit must hold information as to how many officers who have been convicted and are still continuing in service, what is the rationale in allowing the continuance of such police officers. 

Click here to read the judgment.


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgment from courts. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Supreme Court : High Courts Have Sole Authority Under Article 226 To Decide Validity of Tax Provision, Even if Matter Is Sub-Judice Before Income...

A Full Bench of the Supreme Court held that the validity of a provision is a serious matter which could only be decided by...

Kerala High Court Rejects Writ Petition for Rejection of Loan Application

Case: Anvardeen. K v. Union of India. Coram: Justice P.V. Asha On 24th November 2020, The Kerala High Court involving a single bench judge of the...

Supreme Court: Maritime Board Must Not Wallow in Inaction and Be Arbitrary in Its Contractual Duties

A Division Bench of the Supreme Court held that a State instrumentality such as the Maritime Board is expected to act without any arbitrariness...

Supreme Court: Right to Property Is a Constitutional Right, the Essence of Rule of Law Protects It

A Division Bench of the Supreme Court has held that permitting the State to assert indefinite right upon one’s property, without any legal sanction...

Madras High Court Directs Tahsildar To Issue Origin Certificates To Two Sisters in Two Writ Petitions

Two Writ Petitions by two siblings was filed under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution. The petitions owed to the fact that they were...

Delhi High Court Directs Centre and Delhi Govt To Consider a PIL Seeking Paid Menstrual Leave as Representation

The Delhi High Court had provided direction to consider a petition as representation. The Central and Delhi governments were directed to consider the same....

Madras High Court Reiterates That ‘Ignorance of Law’ Is Not an Excuse and Dismisses Petition by a Constable

A Constable committed bigamy and deserted his service for more than 21 days. After dismissal from his service, he moved to Tamil Nadu Administrative...

Transfer of Winding-up Proceedings Allowed Under S. 434, Restrictions Under 2016 Rules To Not Apply: Allahabad High Court

This appeal relates to the question of transfer of winding-up proceeding from the High Court (Company Court) to the NCLT.  Facts M/s. Girdhar Trading Company, 2nd...

Constitutional Court of South Africa Declares Provisions of Domestic Workers’ Injury Compensation Legislation To Be Unconstitutional

The Constitutional Court of South Africa in Sylvia Mahlangu v Minister of Labour , declared parts of the Compensation for Occupational Injuries and Diseases...

Bail Granted Under Section 167(2) CrPC Can Be Cancelled Under Section 439(2) CrPC: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court held that the right of default bail of the Accused can be cancelled under Section 439(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. Facts...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -