CWP-10021-2022 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT Balwinder Singh State of Punjab & CORAM: Present: NAMIT KUMAR, J. CM-5329-CWP 31.01.2026 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar is taken on record as Annexure P CWP-10021 1. Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of quashing the impugned order dated order dated 17. recommendation dated 17. No.5, whereby provisions under Rule 16.2 of Punjab Police Rules, 1934 service. Further, a (O&M) (1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Balwinder Singh Versus State of Punjab & others HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT KUMAR Mr. B.S.Seemer, Advocate, Advocate, Mr. Amarpreet Singh Bains, AAG, Punjab. NAMIT KUMAR, J. (Oral) CWP-2026 Application is allowed as prayed for and the judgment dated 31.01.2026 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar is taken on record as Annexure P-11. 10021-2022 (O&M) The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of the impugned order dated 07.01.2022 (Annexure P order dated 17.03.2021 (Annexure P-3), passed by respondent No.4 and recommendation dated 17.03.2021 (Annexure P , whereby the petitioner has been dismissed from service under Article 311(2)(a) of the Constitution of India read with Rule 16.2 of Punjab Police Rules, 1934, . Further, a writ in the nature of mandamus IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-10021-2022 (O&M) Date of Decision: 23.07.2026 ...Petitioner ...Respondents NAMIT KUMAR Advocate, for the petitioner. AAG, Punjab. Application is allowed as prayed for and the judgment dated 31.01.2026 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar is taken The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorari for 1.2022 (Annexure P-8), as well as passed by respondent No.4 and 3.2021 (Annexure P-2) passed by respondent the petitioner has been dismissed from service by invoking he Constitution of India read with without considering his long writ in the nature of mandamus has been sought directing Application is allowed as prayed for and the judgment dated 31.01.2026 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar is taken The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under certiorari for s well as passed by respondent No.4 and 2) passed by respondent by invoking he Constitution of India read with long directing VIMAL KUMAR 2026.07.24 15:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CWP-10021-2022 (O&M) the respondent authorities to reconsider the punishment imposed by the respondent authorities under Rule 16.32 of Punjab Police Rules, 1934 by taking into consideration 2. was dismissed from service while invoking the provisions of Article India read with Rule of dismissal, there dated 14.01.2021 Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act a complaint Criminal Complaint No.88/2010 dated 05.04.2010 titled as ‘ Singh Vs. Balwinder Singh proceedings arising out of the complaint under Section Instruments Act, the petitioner learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Amritsar 01.12.2014, whereas FIR No.13 date investigation 3. subsequently judgment dated Amritsar (Annexure P this Court in CRR Singh’ (Annexure P learned counsel for the petitioner submits that (O&M) (2) the respondent authorities to reconsider the punishment imposed by the respondent authorities under Rule 16.32 of Punjab Police Rules, 1934 by taking into consideration his service of more than 28 years Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was dismissed from service, vide order dated while invoking the provisions of Article 311(2)(a) of India read with Rule 16.2(1) of Punjab Police Rules, 1934 of dismissal, there was reference of two criminal cases i.e. dated 14.01.2021 registered under Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act at Police Station Sadar, complaint case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act Criminal Complaint No.88/2010 dated 05.04.2010 titled as ‘ Singh Vs. Balwinder Singh’. Learned counsel proceedings arising out of the complaint under Section Instruments Act, the petitioner was convicted and sentenced by the Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Amritsar 01.12.2014, whereas FIR No.13 dated 14.01.2021 was investigation at the time when he was dismissed from service. Learned counsel for the petitioner further subsequently, the petitioner has been acquitted in both the cases judgment dated 31.01.2026, passed by learned (Annexure P-11) and vide judgment dated 09.02.2023 passed in CRR-1238-2020 titled as ‘Balwinder Singh Vs. Palwinder (Annexure P-9) respectively. In view of the said developments, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent authorities to reconsider the punishment imposed by the respondent authorities under Rule 16.32 of Punjab Police Rules, 1934 by ore than 28 years. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner vide order dated 17.03.2021 (Annexure P-3), 311(2)(a) of the Constitution of of Punjab Police Rules, 1934. In the said order reference of two criminal cases i.e. (i) FIR No.13 under Sections 307/427/148/149 IPC and at Police Station Sadar, Amritsar; and (ii) case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act i.e. Criminal Complaint No.88/2010 dated 05.04.2010 titled as ‘Palwinder Learned counsel further submits that in the proceedings arising out of the complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable convicted and sentenced by the Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Amritsar, vide judgment dated d 14.01.2021 was still under he was dismissed from service. for the petitioner further submits that, the petitioner has been acquitted in both the cases, vide learned Additional Sessions Judge, and vide judgment dated 09.02.2023 passed by Balwinder Singh Vs. Palwinder n view of the said developments, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is entitled to the respondent authorities to reconsider the punishment imposed by the respondent authorities under Rule 16.32 of Punjab Police Rules, 1934 by Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner , he Constitution of In the said order FIR No.13 307/427/148/149 IPC and d (ii) i.e. Palwinder submits that in the 138 of the Negotiable convicted and sentenced by the Court of vide judgment dated under , vide Additional Sessions Judge, by Balwinder Singh Vs. Palwinder n view of the said developments, is entitled to VIMAL KUMAR 2026.07.24 15:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CWP-10021-2022 (O&M) seek reconsideration of his dismissal from service. that the petitioner may be permitted to withdraw the present petition liberty to approach the competent authority representation, which may be manner. 4. learned counsel for the petitioner. 5. 6. four weeks from today, the same shall be considered and d competent authority speaking order after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner. 7. 23.07.2026 Vimal (O&M) (3) seek reconsideration of his dismissal from service. that the petitioner may be permitted to withdraw the present petition liberty to approach the competent authority representation, which may be considered and Learned State counsel is not averse to the contention raised by learned counsel for the petitioner. Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. If any such representation is submitted by the petitioner within weeks from today, the same shall be considered and d competent authority, within a period of three speaking order after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the Pending application, if any, stands disposed of as well. Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether reportable: seek reconsideration of his dismissal from service. He, therefore, submits that the petitioner may be permitted to withdraw the present petition with liberty to approach the competent authority by submitting a detailed considered and decided in a time bound Learned State counsel is not averse to the contention raised by Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. submitted by the petitioner within weeks from today, the same shall be considered and disposed of by the a period of three months thereafter, by passing a speaking order after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the Pending application, if any, stands disposed of as well. (NAMIT KUMAR) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No submits with detailed bound Learned State counsel is not averse to the contention raised by submitted by the petitioner within by the by passing a speaking order after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the VIMAL KUMAR 2026.07.24 15:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.