Dismissed

Rajwinder Singh v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC21 Feb 2024CRWP/954/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Habeas corpus petition alleging forcible restraint of a detenue by private respondents. The alleged detenue appeared in court and stated she was living with her parents willingly and was being harassed by the petitioner, who repeatedly defied orders to appear in person. State counsel reported the petitioner stood booked on the detenue's complaints.

What the court decided

AI extract

Rajwinder Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors. — Bail and Remand | Punjab & Haryana HC (2024)

¶1

312 �� IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

CRWP-954-2024 Date of decision: 21.02.2024

RAJWINDER SINGH

....Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS

¶7

...Respondents

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN

¶9

Present: Mr. Anantdeep Singh Sandhu, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶10

Mr. Harish Mehla, AAG, Punjab along with Respondent No.2 in person.

¶11

Mr. Tarun Jhatta, Advocate for respondents No.4 & 5.

¶12

PANKAJ JAIN, J. (ORAL)

¶13

The present petition narrates a shocking tale w.r.t. abuse of process of law. The petitioner sought writ in the nature of habeas corpus claiming that detenue is a major and wants to be in company of the petitioner but has been forcibly restrained by the private respondents.

¶14

On 6^th of February, 2024 the detenue appeared. She in clear terms submitted that she was living with her parents and wants to be in their company only. However, she is being continuously harassed at the hands of the petitioner. More so, when she is shortly getting married. The matter was thereafter adjourned to 8^th of February, 2024 and the petitioner was directed to remain present in person. Petitioner appeared on 8^th of February, 2024 but seemed to be incorrigible. He was again directed to appear in person on 13^th of February, 2024. However in defiance of the orders, he opted not to be

¶15

Deepak Kumar 2024.02.22 18:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶16

CRWP-954-2024 -2-

¶17

2024:PHHC:024555

¶18

present. Respondent No.2 was directed to make sure that the petitioner remains present on the next date of hearing i.e. on 15^th of February, 2024. However, on 15^th of February, 2024 the petitioner again opted not to be present in person and no satisfactory reply was received from the quarters of respondent No.2. Resultantly, respondent No.2 was directed to be present in person on 20^th of February, 2024.

¶19

Counsel for the detenue submitted that despite repeated complaints, Police Authorities have remained inert. The matter was adjourned to today.

¶20

State Counsel submits that cognizance of the complaint(s) submitted by the detenue has been taken and the petitioner now stands booked.

¶21

Keeping in view the aforesaid circumstances, the present petition is dismissed with costs of Rs.10,000/-.

¶22

The costs shall be recovered from the petitioner and shall be deposited with the Punjab and Haryana High Court Bar Association Lawyer's Family Welfare Fund.

¶23

February 21, 2024	(Pankaj Jain)
Dpr	Judge
Whether speaking/reasoned	: Yes/No
Whether reportable	: Yes/No

¶24

Deepak Kumar 2024.02.22 18:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Rajwinder Singh v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Rajwinder Singh v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gurmeet Singh Vs State of Punjab

Sanjay @ Bholu Vs State of Haryana

Harbhajan Singh Vs State of Punjab

Deepak Vs State of Haryana

Bittu Vs State of Haryana

Karam Singh Vs State of Haryana