The Court found that the respondent had complied with the earlier direction by filing an affidavit and taking steps regarding the petitioner's representation. Consequently, the contempt was held to be purged and the rule was discharged.
Rule discharged; contempt purged.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
219
COCP-2798-2025 Date of decision: 12.01.2026
SANTOKH SINGH
..Petitioner
Versus
MANINDER SINGH IPS
..Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA
Present: Mr. Amrit Paul Nahar, Advocate for Mr. Sham Lal Saha, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Ravneet S. Joshi, DAG, Punjab.
SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J. (Oral)
January 12th , 2026 (SUDEEPTI SHARMA) Ayub/Saahil JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No
SAHIL 2026.01.13 10:10 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the respondent had complied with the direction of the previous order dated 13.01.2025?
Santokh Singh
Maninder Singh IPS
Sudeepti Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
