Every day, the Supreme Court and the High Courts across India decide cases that quietly shape the rules ordinary people live under — from how protests are policed to what government employees can and cannot do. This digest, put together by Sukhdeep Singh Khaira & Associates in Patiala, picks out the developments most likely to matter to residents of Punjab and explains them in plain language, without the legal jargon.
Supreme Court quashes FIRs against students booked during the July NEET protests
On September 1, the Supreme Court ordered that all FIRs registered anywhere in India over the student protests held between July 20 and 25 — connected to the NEET-UG paper-leak controversy — be treated as closed, and directed that no fresh FIRs be registered over the same protests. The Court used its special constitutional powers under Article 142 to reach this pan-India order, after the Centre and several state governments told the Court they had already promised protest leaders that cases would be withdrawn. One exception was carved out: Delhi Police may still pursue a single FIR against a group of individuals identified as having serious existing criminal records, limited to allegations of violence or damage to property. The Court also recorded the government’s assurance that a nationwide compensation policy will be worked out within three months for families of students who died by suicide after the NEET exam was cancelled.
For anyone in Punjab who has ever been swept into an FIR over a protest, agitation, or public demonstration — even without personal wrongdoing — this case is a useful reminder that courts do have the power to quash such FIRs in appropriate circumstances. If you or a family member is facing an FIR that you believe was wrongly registered, our criminal law and FIR quashing practice can help you understand your options.
Source: LiveLaw
Supreme Court asks the Centre to study "totaliser" machines for counting EVM votes
Also on September 1, the Supreme Court — hearing a plea seeking anonymised vote-counting — asked the Union government to examine whether "totaliser" machines can be introduced for counting votes recorded on EVMs. A totaliser combines the votes from several EVMs before results are declared, so it becomes harder to work out how a particular polling booth voted. The Election Commission told the Court it supports the underlying idea of protecting voters’ anonymity but flagged practical hurdles, including changes needed to current rules and to how candidates verify results. The Court asked the Centre to specifically look at an existing rule that already allows aggregated counting where there is a risk of voters being identified and possibly intimidated.
This case doesn’t affect any pending litigation, but it is a good example of how India’s election machinery keeps evolving in response to real concerns about voter safety.
Source: Bar and Bench
Punjab & Haryana High Court strikes down Haryana’s blanket foreign travel ban on government employees
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has set aside a Haryana government order that barred all state government employees from travelling abroad, for either official or personal reasons, until September 2026 — a restriction the government had defended as a fuel-and-cost-saving measure linked to global supply disruptions. The case was brought by a nursing officer from PGIMS, Rohtak, who had been denied leave to travel to Australia for a professional examination despite having already obtained her visa and clearances. Justice Harpreet Singh Brar held that an across-the-board ban applied to an entire class of employees, with no regard for individual circumstances, was disproportionate and violated the constitutional right to personal liberty and, in this case, the right to pursue higher professional qualification. The Court directed the authorities to let the employee travel as planned.
The ruling is a useful reminder that even government instructions and service-related restrictions can be challenged before the High Court when they are applied too broadly or without regard to individual facts.
Source: LiveLaw
If you’re dealing with a similar legal issue and would like to understand where you stand, feel free to get in touch with our office in Patiala.
This digest is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Advocate Sukhdeep Singh Khaira & Associates, Patiala.