CHANDER PAL AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS
LPA/965/2026 · 2026-04-20
Deepak Manchanda, Harsimran Singh Sethi
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 2366 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 2366 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
124
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
LPA-965-2026 (O&M)
Date of Decision : 20.04.2026
CHANDER PAL AND ANOTHER
........Appellants VERSUS THE STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS
........Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MANCHANDA
Present: Mr. Ashok Kumar Verma, Advocate for the appellants.
Ms. Anu Pal, Addl. A.G., Haryana.
Mr. Abhilaksh, Advocate for respondent Nos.6 to 12.
HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI, J. (Oral)
1.
After arguing for sometime, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the view taken by the learned Single Judge while passing the
order dated 23.01.2026 in CWP No. 31054 of 2024 was contrary to the view taken by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No. 10667 of 2017 titled “Ram Singh and ors. Vs. State of Haryana and ors.”, decided on 18.05.2017, which judgment could not be brought to the notice of the learned Single Judge at the time of passing the order dated 23.01.2026 hence, the present appeal may kindly be disposed of as having been not pressed any further with liberty file review before the learned Single Judge and in case, even after the decision of the review, the appellant is still prejudiced, to take appropriate remedy as per law.
2.
Ordered accordingly.
3.
Miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
(HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI) JUDGE
20-04-2026 Sapna Goyal
(DEEPAK MANCHANDA) JUDGE
NOTE: Whether speaking/ reasoned: YES
Whether reportable: NO SAPNA GOYAL 2026.04.22 09:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document