Judicial Review Not Negated In Election Matters Where Level Playing Field Is Impaired By Violence: Supreme Court FIR Registration | Prospective Accused Has Locus Standi To Appeal Against Single Judge's Direction: Supreme Court Executing Deed Claiming Disputed Property Not 'False Document' Without Impersonation; Civil Disputes Can't Be Criminalised: Allahabad High Court Section 24 CPC | Partition Suit Can Be Transferred To High Court To Avoid Inconsistent Findings With Pending Testamentary Proceedings: Bombay High Court Upgraded Junior High Schools Lose Separate Legal Identity; Recruitment Under 1978 Rules Not Maintainable For Resulting Vacancies: Allahabad High Court Section 370 IPC | Consent Of Victim Is Irrelevant For Proving Trafficking; High Court Sustains Conviction Despite Acquittal Under Section 370A(2) Section 307 IPC | Absence Of Bodily Injury Does Not Exclude Offence If Intention Or Knowledge Is Established From Surrounding Circumstances: Delhi High Court Income Tax Reopening | Assessing Officer Cannot Initiate Reassessment Based On Third-Party Allegations Without Establishing Direct Nexus With Assessee: Gujarat High Court Section 294 CrPC | Non-Examination Of Autopsy Doctor Not Fatal To Prosecution When Post-Mortem Report's Genuineness Is Undisputed: Karnataka High Court Section 25 Arms Act | Mere Custody Without Awareness Not An Offence, 'Conscious Possession' Essential: Delhi High Court Quashes FIR Over Single Live Cartridge Section 20 Prevention Of Corruption Act | Statutory Presumption Cannot Be Triggered Without Proof Of Demand; Mere Recovery Insufficient: Himachal Pradesh High Court Article 227 Constitution of India | High Court Cannot Sit In Appeal Over Findings Of Tribunal Under Supervisory Jurisdiction: Kerala High Court Mere Registration Of Will Does Not Dispense With Requirement To Prove Execution Under Section 68 Evidence Act: Madras High Court Insurance Policy Exclusion | Onus To Prove Suicide Can Be Discharged By Circumstantial Evidence And Unexplained Discrepancies In Medical Records: NCDRC Registration Act | Contested Decree Declaring Pre-Existing Rights By Adverse Possession Does Not Require Compulsory Registration Or Stamp Duty: Madhya Pradesh High Court Section 100 Patents Act | Government Empowered To Authorise Manufacture Of Patented Life-Saving Drugs For Non-Commercial Distribution To Patients: Kerala High Court Madras High Court Slaps ₹1 Lakh Cost On Centre Over Botched Prisoner Repatriation Contempt Of Court | Bona Fide Efforts To Verify Credentials Preclude Finding Of 'Wilful Disobedience': Telangana High Court Financial Commissioner Cannot Remand Appointment Of Lambardar Without Finding Perversity In Collector’s Order: Punjab & Haryana High Court Article 226 | High Court Cannot Act As Second Appellate Authority Over Transfer Orders; Judicial Review Permissible Only On Four Limited Grounds: Rajasthan High Court Drugs and Cosmetics Act | Prosecution Must Prove Possession And Lack Of Licence Through Independent Evidence; Failure Of Panch Witnesses Is Fatal: Telangana High Court Section 392 IPC | Appellate Courts Can Reduce Sentence To Period Already Undergone Considering Protracted Litigation And Lack Of Criminal Antecedents: Punjab & Haryana High Court

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

07 May 2024 2:49 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