# Punjab Police Assistant Sub-Inspector vs State of Punjab (Punjab Police personnel vs State of Punjab; \[name withheld\] and Another vs State of Punjab)

HTML version: [https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-2019-0016](https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-2019-0016)

## Report card

By judgment dated 12 September 2019 in CRA-D-109-DB of 2014 with CRA-D-146-DB of 2014 and CRA-D-298-DB of 2014, the Punjab and Haryana High Court (Coram: Rajiv Sharma, Harinder Singh Sidhu, JJ.) affirmed the conviction of 4 police personnel, namely: Assistant Sub-Inspector, Punjab Police, Abohar; Head Constable, Punjab Police, Abohar; Assistant Sub-Inspector, Punjab Police, Abohar; Assistant Sub-Inspector, Punjab Police, Abohar, and directed payment of compensation of Rs 41.1 lakh (Rs 41,08,000).

- Register number: PB 22 CW 0001
- Case reference: CRA-D-109-DB of 2014 with CRA-D-146-DB of 2014 and CRA-D-298-DB of 2014
- Court and date: Punjab and Haryana High Court (Coram: Rajiv Sharma, Harinder Singh Sidhu, JJ.), 12 September 2019
- Officer(s) at the material time: Assistant Sub-Inspector, Punjab Police, Abohar; Head Constable, Punjab Police, Abohar; Assistant Sub-Inspector, Punjab Police, Abohar; Assistant Sub-Inspector, Punjab Police, Abohar
- Present service status: Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked: Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 304 Part II/149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 307/149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959
- Finding of the Court (extract): “The appellants may not have the intention to cause death of the labourers, but they knew that firing at the unarmed mob would result in deaths.” (at para 104)
- Verdict, sentence and quantum: Conviction upheld. Sentence: imprisonment and fine; maximum substantive term of 10 years. Compensation: Rs 41.1 lakh (Rs 41,08,000).
- Present status of the proceedings: No further proceedings are recorded in the cited sources; the judgment is the concluded position shown.
- Source orders: [Judgment / order (primary source)](https://indiankanoon.org/doc/90020753/); [Permanent link to this record](https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-2019-0016)

**Record:** CW-2019-0016 (compiler id CWC-0720); case GAP8-007
**Title:** Punjab Police Assistant Sub-Inspector vs State of Punjab (Punjab Police personnel vs State of Punjab; \[name withheld\] and Another vs State of Punjab)
**Court:** Punjab and Haryana High Court; judges: Rajiv Sharma; Harinder Singh Sidhu
**Case number / citation:** CRA-D-109-DB of 2014 with CRA-D-146-DB of 2014 and CRA-D-298-DB of 2014
**Judgment:** 2019-09-12 (2019, day precision)
**Incident date:** 1991-10-25 (1991)
**Place:** Fazilka, Punjab (district at time: Ferozepur); city town: Abohar; police station or unit: Police Station City Abohar; force: state_police
**Category:** Violence & unlawful detention
**Sub-category:** disproportionate force
**Outcome:** Conviction upheld (conviction_upheld)
**Sections:** IPC 148; IPC 302/149; IPC 304 Part II/149; IPC 307/149; Arms Act s.27
**Officers (gated display forms):** Assistant Sub-Inspector, Punjab Police, Abohar; Head Constable, Punjab Police, Abohar; Assistant Sub-Inspector, Punjab Police, Abohar; Assistant Sub-Inspector, Punjab Police, Abohar (4 in record)
**Victims:** Abohar man, age 30; Abohar man, age 26; Abohar man, age 40; Abohar man; Abohar man, age 40; Abohar man; Abohar boy, age 11; Abohar man, age 18 (8 in record)
**Sentence / compensation:** mixed; max 10 yrs; Rs 41.1 lakh (Rs 41,08,000)
**Sentence type:** mixed (mixed)

The judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court records the following account. On 25 October 1991 police fired on unarmed striking workers of Bhawani Cotton Mill, Abohar, killing six workers and two boys and injuring eighteen others; the police then registered FIR No.179 against the labourers claiming self-defence. On the workers' petition the High Court ordered a DIG-rank investigation in 1997, and the Additional Sessions Judge, Ferozepur convicted four policemen in December 2013. The Division Bench held there was no lawful order to fire on the peaceful assembly and that the counter-case was foisted to save the officials. It converted the Section 302/149 convictions to Section 304 Part-II/149 (quantum hearing fixed 26 September 2019), upheld the Sections 148 and 307/149 and Section 27 Arms Act convictions, abated the appeal of the deceased appellant, and directed the State to pay compensation to eight bereaved families and seventeen injured workmen with 9% interest from the incident date.

> The appellants may not have the intention to cause death of the labourers, but they knew that firing at the unarmed mob would result in deaths.

**Sources (1):** [indiankanoon.org](https://indiankanoon.org/doc/90020753/)
**Verification:** V2 · Externally reported
**Review:** Solo Staff combined review (one combined attestation) — not yet recorded
**admin category:** brutality
**admin subcategory:** disproportionate_force
**allegations:** {'category': 'Other', 'primary': True, 'position': 'Material fact supported', 'position_explainer': 'Reliable material supports a specifically documented fact relevant to that allegation, not necessarily the full allegation, causation, intent, unlawfulness, or responsibility.', 'official_finding_relation': 'supports allegation'}
**anonymised:** True
**court quote para:** 104
**display title redacted:** Punjab Police Assistant Sub-Inspector vs State of Punjab (Punjab Police personnel vs State of Punjab; \[name withheld\] and Another vs State of Punjab)
**followup history:** {'date': '2026-09-19', 'scope': 'Round-8 full re-verification: published record re-checked against the judgment text (outcome, officers, quote, key facts) plus methodology-compliance pass', 'method': 'skills-guided adversarial re-verification of the published record against the judgment text (reverify/t1-*/adversarial-8.jsonl)', 'result': 'holds', 'corrections_applied': \['court_quote_para'\]}
**followup status:** checked
**institutional response:** {'date': None, 'action_type': 'Conviction', 'status': 'Concluded', 'authority': 'Trial court (as recorded in the Punjab and Haryana High Court judgment)', 'independence': 'External', 'legal_effect': 'Binding', 'description': 'The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Punjab and Haryana High Court judgment.', 'disposition': 'Conviction · Supports allegation', 'source': 'CRA-D-109-DB of 2014 with CRA-D-146-DB of 2014 and CRA-D-298-DB of 2014', 'recheck': 'Not yet re-checked.'}; {'date': '2019-09-12', 'action_type': 'Order issued', 'status': 'Concluded', 'authority': 'Punjab and Haryana High Court', 'independence': 'External', 'legal_effect': 'Binding', 'description': 'The Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.', 'disposition': 'Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)', 'source': 'CRA-D-109-DB of 2014 with CRA-D-146-DB of 2014 and CRA-D-298-DB of 2014', 'recheck': 'Not yet re-checked.'}
**last checked:** 2026-09-19
**link checked per url:** {'url': 'https://indiankanoon.org/doc/90020753/', 'link_checked': None}
**retracted:** {"is_retracted": false}
**service:** police
**source assessment:** {"established": null, "basis": null}
**status:** current
**subcategory display:** disproportionate force
**tier:** Tier A — Externally reported or officially recorded
**tier badge:** Externally reported
**tier history:** Tier A — Externally reported or officially recorded
**verdict:** accept
**verdict note:** DB upheld 148/307-149 and Arms Act convictions, converted 302/149 to 304-II/149, ordered compensation with 9% interest.
**verification badge:** V2 · Externally reported
**verification status:** V2
**victims redacted:** {'age': 30, 'gender': 'male', 'descriptor': 'a man'}; {'age': 26, 'gender': 'male', 'descriptor': 'a man'}; {'age': 40, 'gender': 'male', 'descriptor': 'a man'}; {'age': None, 'gender': 'male', 'descriptor': 'a man'}; {'age': 40, 'gender': 'male', 'descriptor': 'a man'}; {'age': None, 'gender': 'male', 'descriptor': 'a man'}; {'age': 11, 'gender': 'male', 'descriptor': 'a 11-year-old boy'}; {'age': 18, 'gender': 'male', 'descriptor': 'a man'}
**watch:** babuwatch

Status: Conviction upheld.

[Open CW-2019-0016](https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-2019-0016)