Jagdish Singh v. the Union of India and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC8 Apr 2025CWP/2899/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Police Clearance Certificate NOC passport re-issuance mandamus; FIR No.15 cancellation report prepared 11-08-2018 presented 29-03-2025 before SDJM Payal; Ss.447, 511, 379 IPC no cognizable offence civil property dispute; Mohan Lal @ Mohna 2023 (3) RCR (Civil) 772 co-ordinate Bench; direction to decide within six weeks; Union of India respondents; departmental action against police officials for delay; Harsh Bunger J; CWP-2899-2025 (O&M) High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh 08.04.2025.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents No.1 and 2/concerned authority to consider and decide the petitioner's application for issuance of passport in the light of Mohan Lal @ Mohna's case (2023 (3) RCR (Civil) 772) within a period of six weeks; all pending applications, if any, closed. ¶¶32

Jagdish Singh Vs the Union of India and Others — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶32

Issue for consideration

Whether a writ in the nature of mandamus should issue directing the respondents/Police Authorities to issue a Police Clearance Certificate/NOC for the purpose of re-issuance of the petitioner's passport.

¶¶17

Court's answer

The writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents No.1 and 2/concerned authority to consider and decide the petitioner's application for issuance of passport in the light of the co-ordinate Bench judgment in Mohan Lal @ Mohna's case (2023 (3) RCR (Civil) 772).

¶¶32

Ratio / Principle

A final decision on the application for issuance of passport is to be taken within a period of six weeks from the date of the order (08.04.2025).

¶¶32

Key takeaways

All pending application(s), if any, shall also stand closed.obiter¶¶33

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab and Haryana High Court (Harsh Bunger, J.), CWP-2899-2025 (O&M), decided 08.04.2025 — Petitioner (acting through a general power of attorney holder) sought a mandamus directing the police authorities to issue a Police Clearance Certificate/NOC for re-issuance of his passport. In a status report dated 07.04.2025 filed by Jyoti Yadav, IPS, SSP, Police District Khanna (on behalf of respondents No.3 and 4), it was disclosed that an application (No. 207-P dated 31-01-2018) by Varinderpreet Singh for cancellation of FIR No.15 was inquired into by the then SP(H), Khanna, who found the dispute essentially civil in nature (possession over land), with no cognizable offence under Sections 447, 511 or 379 IPC made out; a cancellation report was prepared on 11-08-2018 but was presented before the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Payal only on 29-03-2025 (case adjourned to 19-04-2025 for protest petition), prompting consideration of departmental action against the erring officials for the unexplained lapse. Counsel for respondents No.1 and 2/Union of India did not dispute that the petitioner's case was covered by the co-ordinate Bench judgment in Mohan Lal @ Mohna v. Union of India and others, 2023 (3) RCR (Civil) 772. Disposing of the petition, the Court directed respondents No.1 and 2/concerned authority to consider and decide the passport application in the light of that judgment within six weeks; pending applications stood closed.

¶1

-1-

¶2

CWP-2899-2025 (O&M)

¶3

213

¶4

**IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ******

¶5

CWP-2899-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: 08.04.2025

¶6

Jagdish Singh through General Power of Attorney Mohan Singh

¶7

….Petitioner

¶8

Versus

¶9

The Union of India and others

¶10

….Respondents

¶11

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSH BUNGER

¶12

Present : Mr. Hasrat Brar, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶13

Ms. Gurneet Sagoo, Advocate for respondents No.1 and 2/Union of India.

¶14

Mr. Nirmaljit Singh Diwana, Senior D.A.G., Punjab.

¶15

¶16

HARSH BUNGER, J. (Oral)

¶17

Petition herein is, inter alia , for issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus to direct the respondents/Police Authorities to issue Police Clearance Certificate/NOC for the purpose of re-issuance of passport of the petitioner.

¶18

In compliance of order dated 24.03.2025, a status report dated 07.04.2025 by way of an affidavit of Jyoti Yadav, IPS, Senior Superintendent of Police, Police District Khanna, on behalf of respondents No.3 and 4 has been filed by learned State counsel in Court today, which is taken on record, subject to all just exceptions. The relevant extract of which reads as under:

¶19

“(ii) That as per the report during investigation, one Varinderpreet Singh, son of Darsan Singh, resident of Birkalan, submitted an application No. 207-P dated 31-01-2018, before

¶20

HIMANI GUPTA 2025.04.15 11:44 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh

¶21

CWP-2899-2025 (O&M)

¶22

-2-

¶23

the then Senior Superintendent of Police, Khanna for cancellation of the abovementioned FIR no.15 (Supra). The investigation into the said application was conducted by the then Superintendent of Police (H), Khanna. Upon investigation, it was found that the dispute between the parties was essentially civil in nature and related to possession over the land in question. No theft of bricks or forcible possession could be substantiated during the investigation. Statements of witnesses recorded during the inquiry also did not corroborate the allegations of criminal trespass or theft. Further, the record reflected that the complainant and the accused had already been involved in litigation over the same land for many years. It was thus concluded that no cognizable offence under Sections 447, 511, or 379 IPC was made out, and the case arose out of a property dispute which is already sub-judice before the Court of Competent Jurisdiction. Accordingly, it was recommended by the investigating officer to direct the S.H.O., Doraha, to prepare the cancellation report.

¶24

(iii) That the abovementioned report was approved by the then Superintendent of Police, Khanna, and the cancellation report was prepared on 11-08-2018. However, as per the report of Deputy Superintendent of Police, Payal, the cancellation report regarding FIR no.15 (Supra) was presented before the Court of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Payal, on 29-03-2025. On the said date, the complainant Tejinder Singh also appeared and his statement was duly recorded. The case has been adjourned to 19-04-2025 for filing of protest petition, if any.

¶25

3. That it is respectfully submitted that the notices have been served upon to the concerned police officials as to why the cancellation report, though prepared in the year 2018, was not presented before the concerned Court within a reasonable time and for this unexplained lapse, it is under consideration as to why departmental action should not be initiated against them. However, before proceeding further, the said officials have been

¶26

HIMANI GUPTA 2025.04.15 11:44 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh

¶27

CWP-2899-2025 (O&M) -3-

¶28

afforded an opportunity to submit their explanation. It is respectfully submitted that upon receipt and consideration of replies of the concerned officials, appropriate action shall be taken in accordance with law against the erring officials as per applicable service rules.”

¶29

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that keeping in view

¶30

the aforesaid status report, the case of petitioner herein is squarely covered by the judgment passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in “Mohan Lal @ Mohna Vs. Union of India and others”, 2023 (3) RCR (Civil) 772 .

¶31

Learned counsel appearing for respondents No.1 and 2/Union of India does not dispute the aforesaid position and submits that considering the aforesaid status report, the case of petitioner for issuance of the passport would be considered by the concerned authority in the light of decision rendered in Mohan Lal @ Mohna’s case (supra) and a final decision on the application for issuance of passport shall be taken within a period of six weeks from today.

¶32

Keeping in view the aforesaid submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the instant writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents No.1 and 2/concerned authority to consider and decide the application for issuance of passport submitted by the petitioner in the light of judgment rendered by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Mohan Lal @ Mohna’s case ( supra ) within a period of six weeks from today.

¶33

All pending application(s), if any, shall also stand closed.

¶34

08.04.2025 (HARSH BUNGER) Himani JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No

¶35

HIMANI GUPTA 2025.04.15 11:44 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh

Jagdish Singh v. the Union of India and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jagdish Singh v. the Union of India and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramjit Singh Vs Financial Commissioner Revenue Punjab and Others

Sohan Singh & Ors. Vs the Financial Commissioner Revenue, Pb & Anr.

Dharamvir Singh Vs State of Punjab and Others

Brishbhan Gill Vs Union of India and Another

Chhoto & Ors. Vs F.C. Hry. & Ors.

Sharda Devi Vs Assistant Collector 1 Grade Kanina and Others