Court mandates prompt decision on representation challenging the imposition of fees for accessing FIRs and DDRs on Punjab Police SAANJH Portal.
In a significant judicial intervention, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has responded to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) challenging the imposition of service charges for downloading First Information Reports (FIRs), Daily Diary Reports (DDRs), and lost information receipts from the Punjab Police SAANJH Portal. The petition, filed by Abhishek Malhotra, was heard by a division bench comprising Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sanjiv Berry.
The petitioner, who appeared in person through virtual conferencing, contended that the policy imposing service charges of Rs. 80 for FIRs, Rs. 100 for DDRs, and Rs. 30 for lost information receipts lacked transparency and was not available on the official website of the respondents. The petitioner sought a writ of certiorari to quash this notification or policy, arguing that it contravenes the provisions of Section 173(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Rule 24.5 of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934, and the Supreme Court directions in the Youth Bar Association case.
Additionally, the petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to restore free digital access to FIRs and DDRs on the Punjab Police SAANJH Portal. He also demanded a refund of Rs. 80, which was allegedly charged illegally for downloading a specific FIR, along with interest at 12% per annum from the date of payment.
Crucially, the petitioner highlighted that a representation dated 24th March 2026 was submitted to the Government of Punjab and the Director General of Police, Punjab, but remains pending consideration. In response, the High Court has directed the competent authority to consider this representation and issue a speaking order within 30 days from receiving the certified copy of the court’s order.
The court clarified that its directions should be executed without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, thereby ensuring that the petitioner’s concerns are addressed in accordance with the law.
This judgment underscores the judiciary’s role in ensuring that administrative policies are scrutinized for compliance with legal standards and transparency. The outcome of this directive is keenly awaited, as it may set a precedent for how service charges for public digital access are regulated in the future.
Bottom line:-
Public Interest Litigation - Imposition of service charges for downloading FIRs and DDRs from Punjab Police SAANJH Portal challenged - Court directs the competent authority to consider and decide the pending representation of the petitioner through a speaking order within a stipulated time frame.
Statutory provision(s):
Section 173(2) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023; Rule 24.5 of Punjab Police Rules, 1934; Directions from Supreme Court in Youth Bar Association case
Abhishek Malhotra v. State of Punjab, (Punjab And Haryana)(DB) : Law Finder Doc id # 2888560
