CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench

Harminder Kaur vs State Of Punjab & Others

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 28 April 2026 · Citation: (2026) 04 P&H CK 1692

HON’BLE JUDGES
Jagmohan Bansal, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Constitution Of India, 1950 — Article 226, 227 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 120B, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 · Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 173, 438(2), 438(2)(iii)
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Civil Writ Petition No. 8196 Of 2025
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 364 words

Jagmohan Bansal, J

1.

The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of Look Out Circular (LOC issued by Superintendent of Police (Investigation), Barnala on account of FIR No.533 dated 23.11.2023 registered under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC at Police Station, City Barnala.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was implicated in FIR No.533 dated 23.11.2023. She filed an application before the Sessions Court at Barnala seeking anticipatory bail which was allowed vide order dated 22.08.2024. She had already joined investigation. She filed CRM M-6982-2024 before this Court seeking quashing of aforesaid FIR. This Court vide order dated 09.02.2024 has issued notice of motion and further stayed filing of final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. The petitioner has no intention to flee from justice. She would join proceedings, if at any stage police report is filed. As on day, no trial is pending against her.

3.

Per contra, learned State counsel submits that there is apprehension that petitioner may flee from justice. She was absconding during investigation, thus, LOC was issued.

4.

Heard the arguments and perused the record.

5.

From the perusal of record, it is evident that the petitioner was granted anticipatory bail subject to terms & conditions incorporated in Section 438(2) of Cr.P.C. As per Section 438(2)(iii) of Cr.P.C., the applicant cannot leave India without prior permission of the Court. In view of the said condition, the petitioner cannot leave India without prior approval of the Court.

Even during the course of hearing, the petitioner has undertaken that she would not leave country without prior approval of the Court. The filing of final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. has been stayed by this Court, thus, at present no criminal proceeding is pending against her.

6.

In the wake of above discussion, this Court finds it appropriate to hold that the petitioner would not be detained on the basis of LOC, if she produces permission to leave India granted by the trial Court. In view of the aforestated facts, it would be advisable to the jurisdictional Police Authorities to withdraw the LOC.

7.

Disposed of accordingly.