Punjab and Haryana High Court
CRWP/4298/2025 of NAVJEET SINGH Vs STATE OF PUNJAB on 17 July 2026
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRWP No.4298 of 2025 Date of decision: 17.07.2026 Navjeet Singh …Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present :- Mr. Gagan Oberoi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRWP No.4298 of 2025
Date of decision: 17.07.2026
Navjeet Singh
…Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and others
…Respondents
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL
Present :-
Mr. Gagan Oberoi, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Subhash Godara, Addl. AG, Punjab.
*****
H.S.GREWAL, J. (Oral)
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. The present writ petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for setting aside the impugned order dated 18.02.2025 (Annexure P-14), whereby respondent No.3, instead of passing a reasoned order, has deliberately and intentionally circumvented the directions issued by this Court vide order dated 27.01.2025 passed in CRWP No.807 of 2025 (Annexure P-1). Till date, no order adjudicating the petitioner's claims has been passed, which is in clear violation of the aforesaid order dated 27.01.2025 (Annexure P-1).
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner confines the relief sought in the present writ petition to a limited prayer. It is submitted that the petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by the Punjab State Consumer SEEMA SHARMA 2026.07.18 16:07 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment
CRWP No.4298 of 2025
Dispute Redressal Commission (Annexure P-11), whereby it has been mentioned that the petitioner shall not be released in this case from custody without the prior permission of the Commission. It is prayed that the respondents be directed to consider the petitioner's application for parole independently, without being influenced by the afore-said condition contained in Annexure P-11.
3. Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of with the limited modification that the operation of the condition, requiring prior permission of the Commission before the petitioner's release from custody, shall remain stayed. The competent authority shall consider the petitioner's application for parole independently, in accordance with law, and the impugned order, as well as any similar orders, shall not come in the way of such consideration.
(H.S.GREWAL) 17.07.2026
JUDGE seema Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether Reportable: Yes/No
SEEMA SHARMA 2026.07.18 16:07 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment