CW-2024-0022Kapurthala, PunjabJudgment 3 December 2024

XXXX v. State of Punjab

The judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court records the following account. A Sultanpur Lodhi man @ a Sultanpur Lodhi man was booked in FIR 125 dated 26 June 2024 under Section 22 of the NDPS Act at Sultanpur Lodhi after 525 capsules were recovered from him, but the FSL report received by police on 31 August 2024 showed the tablets contained only acetaminophen (paracetamol). The High Court found police high-handedness in failing to act promptly on the FSL report and get the petitioner released, keeping him in unjust custody till High Court bail on 13 September 2024. The Court awarded Rs 2,00,000 compensation payable within one month, with 50% recoverable from the salary of the erring official Sub-Inspector, and directed masking of the petitioner's name in digital records. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.

Externally reportedV2
What this record means

This page documents a court-adjudicated case from the judgment and cited sources below. Findings are attributed to the court; this record does not add findings of its own.

How verification works →

Report card

By judgment dated 3 December 2024 in CRM-M-40569-2024 (O&M), the Punjab and Haryana High Court (Coram: Kirti Singh, J.) returned findings adverse to the Sub-Inspector, Sultanpur Lodhi Police Station, and directed payment of compensation of Rs 2 lakh (Rs 2,00,000).

Register number
PB 09 CW 0003
Case reference
CRM-M-40569-2024 (O&M)
Court and date
Punjab and Haryana High Court (Coram: Kirti Singh, J.), 3 December 2024
Officer(s) at the material time
Sub-Inspector, Sultanpur Lodhi Police Station
Present service status
Not ascertained from the cited sources.
Provisions invoked
Section 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985
Finding of the Court (extract)
“This Court is deeply troubled by the high-handedness of the police authorities which have flagrantly disregarded the fundamental rights of a citizen as envisaged in the Constitution of India. It is appalling to witness such blatant violation where those entrusted …” (at para 11)
Verdict, sentence and quantum
Adverse finding + compensation. Sentence: compensation only. Compensation: Rs 2 lakh (Rs 2,00,000).
Present status of the proceedings
No further proceedings are recorded in the cited sources; the judgment is the concluded position shown.

Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.

The Punjab and Haryana High Court judgment dated 3 December 2024 is the concluded position shown in the cited sources.

Recorded allegations

1
OtherPrimary
Material fact supported

Reliable material supports a specifically documented fact relevant to that allegation, not necessarily the full allegation, causation, intent, unlawfulness, or responsibility.

Official finding: supports allegation.

What the court found

Holding not recorded separately.

“This Court is deeply troubled by the high-handedness of the police authorities which have flagrantly disregarded the fundamental rights of a citizen as envisaged in the Constitution of India. It is appalling to witness such blatant violation where those entrusted …” (para 11)

Institutional response

1
3 Dec 2024

Order issued

Concluded
Punjab and Haryana High Court External · Binding

The Punjab and Haryana High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 200,000.

Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only).
Source: CRM-M-40569-2024 (O&M)
Not yet re-checked.

Follow-up history

1
19 Sep 2026

(Round-8 full re-verification: published record re-checked against the judgment text (outcome, officers, quote, key facts) plus methodology-compliance pass; skills-guided adversarial re-verification of the published record against the judgment text (reverify/t1-*/adversarial-8.jsonl))

Corrections (0): No corrections recorded.

Review: Solo Staff combined review (one combined attestation) — not yet recorded.

Keep exploring

These records are listed together because they share a state or a topic. That does not mean they are connected.