CW-2025-0038Amritsar, PunjabJudgment 20 May 2025

Mother's plea re FIR u/s 304 IPC against policemen, Amritsar (title not traced)

The Punjab and Haryana High Court (Justice Harpreet Singh Brar) held that the 23 May 2013 point-blank police shooting of 22-year-old an Amritsar man inside an Amritsar barber shop was an excess by the State law-enforcement agency and awarded Rs 15 lakh compensation to his mother. The Court noted the chest wound's black ring proved a point-blank shot fired without warning, arrest attempt or chance to surrender, and rejected self-defence since trained officers with pistols could have arrested a man armed only with a knife. It relied on Prakash Kadam on extra-judicial killings and noted the mother fought 12 years for an FIR and Crime Branch probe. The jurisdictional Magistrate was directed to assess the second cancellation report in the s.304 IPC case. 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 20 May 2025, the Punjab and Haryana High Court (Coram: Harpreet Singh Brar, J.) returned findings adverse to 2 police personnel, namely: Head Constable, Punjab Police, Amritsar; Head Constable, Punjab Police, Amritsar, and directed payment of compensation of Rs 15 lakh (Rs 15,00,000).

Register number
PB 02 CW 0017
Case reference
Not stated
Court and date
Punjab and Haryana High Court (Coram: Harpreet Singh Brar, J.), 20 May 2025
Officer(s) at the material time
Head Constable, Punjab Police, Amritsar; Head Constable, Punjab Police, Amritsar
Present service status
Not ascertained from the cited sources.
Provisions invoked
Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
Finding of the Court (extract)
“Allowing the act of respondent No.5 to go unchecked would effectively mean validating a death sentence, passed not in line with the due process of law, but by the law enforcement agency donning the role of the judge, jury and …” (at para 10)
Verdict, sentence and quantum
Adverse finding + compensation. Sentence: compensation only. Compensation: Rs 15 lakh (Rs 15,00,000).
Present status of the proceedings
The judgment is recent and may be subject to appeal; the pendency of an appeal is not a finding.

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

Judgment dated 20 May 2025. This judgment may still be subject to appeal; initiation or pendency of an appeal is not a finding.

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.

“Allowing the act of respondent No.5 to go unchecked would effectively mean validating a death sentence, passed not in line with the due process of law, but by the law enforcement agency donning the role of the judge, jury and …” (para 10)

Institutional response

1
20 May 2025

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 1,500,000.

Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only).
Source: Punjab and Haryana High Court judgment 2025-05-20
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.