Consensual Relationship That Later Turns Sour Is Not Rape: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Breach of Promise Case Double Presumption of Innocence Applies; No Interference Unless Trial Court Judgment Is Perverse: Allahabad High Court in Murder Appeal Under BNSS A Single Act of Corruption Warrants Dismissal – 32 Years of Service Offers No Immunity: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds ASI’s Removal Suit Against Trustee Without Charity Commissioner’s Consent Is Statutorily Barred: Bombay High Court Government Can't Deny Implied Surrender After Refusing to Accept Possession: Madras HC Clarifies Scope of Section 111(f) of TP Act Custodial Interrogation Must Prevail Over Pre-Arrest Comfort in Hate Speech Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail for Provocative Remarks Against Migrants Mutation Order Without Notice Cannot Stand in Law: Orissa High Court Quashes Tahasildar's Rejection for Violating Natural Justice Cruelty Must Be Grave and Proven – Mere Allegations of Disobedience or Demand for Separate Residence Don’t Justify Divorce: Jharkhand High Court Rejects Husband’s Divorce Appeal Retaliatory Prosecution Cannot Override Liberty: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in PMLA Case Post CBI Trap of ED Officer Illegal Remand Without Production of Accused Is Not a Technical Lapse, But a Constitutional Breach: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Major NDPS Case Inherent Power Under Section 528 BNSS Not a Substitute for Article 226 When FIR Is Under Challenge Without Chargesheet or Cognizance Order: Allahabad High Court Possession Without Title Is Legally Insubstantial: Gujarat HC Dismisses Appeal By Dairy Cooperative Over Void Land Transfer You Can Prosecute a Former Director, But You Can’t Force Him to Represent the Company: Calcutta High Court Lays Down Clear Limits on Corporate Representation in PMLA Cases Conviction Cannot Rest on Tainted Testimony of Injured Witnesses in Isolation: Bombay High Court Acquits Five in Murder Case One Attesting Witness is Sufficient if He Proves Execution and Attestation of Will as Required by Law: AP High Court Land Acquisition | Delay Cannot Defeat Just Compensation: P&H High Court Grants Enhanced Compensation Despite 12-Year Delay in Review Petitions by Landowners Allegations Implausible, Motivated by Malice: Kerala High Court Quashes Rape Case After Finding Abuse Claims a Counterblast to Civil Dispute Adoptions Under Hindu Law Need No Approval from District Magistrate: Madras High Court Declares Administrative Rejection of Adoptive Birth Certificate as Illegal

Punjab and Haryana High Court Quashes FIR and Final Report for Violation of COVID-19 Regulations

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has quashed the First Information Report (FIR) and final report filed against Singer Gurnam Bhullar and others for alleged violations of COVID-19 regulations. The court held that the registration of the FIR and subsequent proceedings were not permissible under the law.

Justice Gurbir Singh, presiding over the case, emphasized the mandatory nature of Section 195(1)(a) of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) and stated, “No court shall take cognizance of the offense punishable under Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) unless a written complaint is made by the concerned public servant.” The court highlighted that the prosecution failed to comply with this requirement, rendering the trial and conviction void ab initio.

The case involved allegations that Singer Gurnam Bhullar and his companions had gathered at Prime Mall without permission during the COVID-19 pandemic and were shooting a film without observing necessary precautions. The FIR was registered based on reliable information provided by a police officer.

The court further emphasized that the COVID-19 pandemic constituted an extraordinary situation, necessitating strict compliance with government instructions and guidelines. The activities during the pandemic required permission from the concerned District Magistrate and adherence to the prescribed guidelines.

Justice Gurbir Singh stated, “The outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic and the ensuing regulations imposed an extraordinary situation. No activity could take place without permission, subject to observing directions for preventing Covid-19 pandemic as issued by the Government.” The court referred to several precedent cases, including C. Muniappan vs. State of Tamil Nadu and Jiwan Kumar vs. State of Punjab, which supported the mandatory requirement of a written complaint by the concerned public servant for registering an FIR.

High court quashed the FIR and final report filed under Section 173 of the Cr.P.C., declaring them impermissible under the law. This ruling brings clarity on the necessity of following proper legal procedures in registering offenses related to COVID-19 violations.

Date of Decision: 05.07.2023

Gurnam Singh Bhullar vs State of Punjab 

Latest Legal News