Baljit Singh v. State Of Punjab And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP-6035-2024 Date of Decision: 10.12.2025 BALJIT SINGH

...Petitioner

Vs.

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

...Respondents

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present:- Ms. Ishal Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Aman Dhir, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab *** JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL) 1.

The petitioner through instant petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of:- i. Order dated 04.01.2021 whereby he was dismissed from service;

ii. Order dated 30.07.2021 whereby his appeal was dismissed; and iii. Order dated 13.01.2023 whereby his revision was also dismissed.

2.

The petitioner was dismissed from service on account of his implication in FIR No.206 under Sections 27-A/61/85 of NDPS Act, 7 & 8 of Prevention of Corruption Act and 170, 420, 120-B of IPC registered at P.S. City Moga. He unsuccessfully preferred appeal and revision before higher authorities.

DEEPAK BISSYAN 2025.12.10 16:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-6035-2024 -23.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that during the pendency of instant petition, the trial Court vide judgment dated 06.11.2025 has acquitted the petitioner, thus, matter needs to be reexamined in the light of 16.3 of Punjab Police Rules, 1934 (in short 'PPR').

4.

On being confronted with judgment dated 02.04.2025 passed by this Court in CWP No.18777 of 2023 titled as "Bala Singh Versus State of Haryana and Others", judgment dated 21.05.2025 passed in CWP No.21304 of 2024 titled as "Nirmaljit Singh Versus State of Punjab and Others" and judgment dated 27.05.2025 passed in CWP No.25411 of 2022 titled as "Dheeraj Kumar Versus State of Haryana and Others", learned State counsel expressed his inability to controvert the fact that as per Rule 16.3 of PPR, matter needs to be reconsidered by the Competent Authority.

5.

In the light of orders passed in Bala Singh (Supra), Nirmaljit Singh (supra) and Dheeraj Kumar (supra) as well as Rule 16.3 of PPR, the impugned orders are hereby set aside and the Appellate Authority is directed to pass fresh order in terms of Rule 16.3 of PPR. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merit. 6.

Disposed of in above terms.

7.

Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. (JAGMOHAN BANSAL) JUDGE December 10, 2025 Deepak DPA Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No DEEPAK BISSYAN 2025.12.10 16:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document