Jai Mata Durga Transport Co. Vs State of Punjab and Others — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Jai Mata Durga Transport Co. Vs State of Punjab and Others — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to respondent No.3 (SSP, Rupnagar) to look into the representation dated 01.03.2025, objectively consider the grievances after affording opportunity to all concerned, take a ratiocinated decision within 15 days and convey it to the petitioner within 7 days thereafter, taking into consideration the dicta in ICICI Bank Ltd. Vs Parkash Kaur (JT-2007(4) SC 39) and Citicorp Maruti Finance Ltd. v/s S Vijayalakhsmi (2012(1) SCC 1); no order as to costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether respondent No.5 should be directed not to interfere with the free plying of the petitioner's vehicle bearing registration No. HR58C9845, in view of the cited Supreme Court judgments. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

Petition disposed of by mandating respondent No.3 (SSP, Rupnagar) to look into the representation dated 01.03.2025 (Annexure P-3) moved by the petitioner.

Key takeaways

Respondent No.3 is to objectively consider the grievances raised in the representation after affording opportunity to all concerned, take a ratiocinated decision within 15 days, and convey that decision to the petitioner within 7 days thereafter.ratio¶¶23
While deciding the representation, the officer is expected to take into consideration the dicta of the Supreme Court in ICICI Bank Ltd. Vs Parkash Kaur and others (JT-2007(4) SC 39) and Citicorp Maruti Finance Ltd. v/s S Vijayalakhsmi (2012(1) SCC 1).ratio¶¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Miscellaneous (CRM-M) under Section 528 BNSS, 2023 — petitioner transport company sought restraint on respondent No.5 from interfering with free plying of vehicle HR58C9845 relying on ICICI Bank Ltd. v. Parkash Kaur and ICICI Bank v. Shanti Devi Sharma — counsel limited prayer to a time-bound decision by SSP, Rupnagar on representation dated 01.03.2025 (Annexure P-3) — HELD: Petition disposed of; SSP, Rupnagar mandated to look into the representation, objectively consider the grievances after affording opportunity to all concerned and take a ratiocinated decision within 15 days, to be conveyed to the petitioner within 7 days thereafter; officer to take into consideration the dicta in ICICI Bank Ltd. v. Parkash Kaur (JT-2007(4) SC 39) and Citicorp Maruti Finance Ltd. v. S Vijayalakhsmi (2012(1) SCC 1); no order as to costs.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

(260-2)

CRM-M-19358-2025 Decided on : 22.09.2025

JAI MATA DURGA TRANSPORT CO.

……PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

……RESPONDENT(S)

CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL

Present:Mr. Onkar Singh Batalvi, Advocate and Mr. Damanjeet Singh Batalvi, Advocate for the petitioners,

Mr. Baljinder Singh Sra, Addl. AG, Punjab. Mr. Atul Goyal, Advocate for respondent No.5.

SUMEET GOEL, JUDGE (Oral)

The petition in hand has been preferred under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 with the following substantive prayer(s):-

“It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that this petition may kindly be allowed and the appropriate direction may kindly be issued to the respondent No.5 not to interfere in the free plying of the vehicle of the petitioner bearing registration No. HR58C9845 in view of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India reported in RCR Criminal 2007(2) page 76 titled as "ICICI Bank Ltd. Vs Parkash Kaur and others" and Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India reported in SLP (Crl.) No. 4935 of 2006 decided on 15.5.2008 in case titled as “ICICI Bank Vs. Shanti Devi Sharma & Ors”, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case; in the interest of justice. ”

Learned counsel for the petitioner after arguing for sometime has

limited his prayer by stating that he would be satisfied, for the nonce, if a direction is issued to respondent No.3 (Senior Superintendent of Police, Rupnagar) to consider and take a conscious decision on the representation

JATIN 2025.09.22 18:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-19358-2025

P a g e

dated 01.03.2025 made by the petitioner (copy whereof has been annexed as Annexure P-3 with the petition in hand) in a time-bound manner.

Having heard learned counsel for the rival party(s) and upon perusal of the paper-book, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the petition in hand as follows:

(i) Respondent No.3 (Senior Superintendent of Police, Rupnagar) is mandated to look into the representation dated 01.03.2025 (Annexure P- 3) moved by the petitioner, objectively consider the grievance(s) raised therein after affording opportunity to all concerned & take ratiocinated decision thereupon within a period of 15 days from today. Said decision be conveyed to the petitioner within 7 days thereafter. It is expected that the said officer, while deciding the said representation, shall take into consideration the dicta of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court passed in ICICI Bank Ltd. Vs Parkash Kaur and others (JT-2007(4) SC 39) and Citicorp Maruti Finance Ltd. v/s S Vijayalakhsmi 2012(1) SCC 1.

(ii) No order as to costs.

(SUMEET GOEL) 22.09.2025 JUDGE jatin

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No

JATIN 2025.09.22 18:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document