CWP-8196-2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Harminder Kaur State of Punjab & others CORAM: HON Present: - Mr. Mr. K.S.Chahal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. for respondents No.1 to 3 *** JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J 1. The the Constitution of India is seeking issued by Superintendent of Police (Investigation), Barnala on account of No.533 dated 23.11.2023 registered under Sections 120B IPC at Police Station 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was implicated in FIR No.533 dated 23.11.2023. She filed an application Sessions Court at order dated 22.08.2024. She ha M-6982-2024 before this Court seeking quashing of aforesaid FIR. This Court vide order dated filing of final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. 2025 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP Date of Decision: Harminder Kaur Versus State of Punjab & others HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Mr. A.S.Dhindsa, Advocate, for Mr. K.S.Chahal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Ishan Kaushal, AAG, Punjab, for respondents No.1 to 3. *** JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (Oral) The petitioner through instant petition under Article the Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of Look Out Circular (LOC) issued by Superintendent of Police (Investigation), Barnala on account of 533 dated 23.11.2023 registered under Sections 120B IPC at Police Station, City Barnala. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was implicated in FIR No.533 dated 23.11.2023. She filed an application Sessions Court at Barnala seeking anticipatory bail which was allowed vide 22.08.2024. She had already joined investigation. 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. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-8196-2025 Date of Decision: 28.04.2026 …Petitioner …Respondents BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Mr. K.S.Chahal, Advocate, for the petitioner. petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of setting aside of Look Out Circular (LOC) issued by Superintendent of Police (Investigation), Barnala on account of FIR 533 dated 23.11.2023 registered under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 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 Barnala seeking anticipatory bail which was allowed vide already joined investigation. She filed CRM- 2024 before this Court seeking quashing of aforesaid FIR. This Court 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 of setting aside of Look Out Circular (LOC) FIR 465, 467, 468, 471, Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was before the Barnala seeking anticipatory bail which was allowed vide - 2024 before this Court seeking quashing of aforesaid FIR. This Court 09.02.2024 has issued notice of motion and further stayed The petitioner has no intention VIMAL KUMAR 2026.04.28 17:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-8196-2025 to flee from justice. She would join proceedings, if at any stage police report is filed. As on day, no trial is 3. Per contra, learned State counsel submits that there is apprehension that petitioner may flee from justice. She was absc investigation, thus, LOC was issued. 4. Heard the arguments and perused the record. 5. From granted anticipatory bail subject to terms & 438(2) of Cr.P.C. leave India without prior permission of the Court. condition, the petitioner cannot leave India without prior approval o Even during the course of hearing not leave country without prior approval of the Court. 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. aforestated facts, i to withdraw the LOC. 7. Disposed of accordingly. 28.04.2026 Vimal Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable 2025 -2- e from justice. She would join proceedings, if at any stage police report is filed. As on day, no trial is pending against her. Per contra, learned State counsel submits that there is apprehension that petitioner may flee from justice. She was absc investigation, thus, LOC was issued. Heard the arguments and perused the record. 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. condition, the petitioner cannot leave India without prior approval o ven during the course of hearing, the petitioner has undertaken that she would not leave country without prior approval of the Court. under Section 173 Cr.P.C. has been stayed by this Court, thus, at present no minal proceeding is pending against her. 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. aforestated facts, it would be advisable to the jurisdictional Police Authorities to withdraw the LOC. Disposed of accordingly. Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No e from justice. She would join proceedings, if at any stage police report is pending against her. Per contra, learned State counsel submits that there is apprehension that petitioner may flee from justice. She was absconding during Heard the arguments and perused the record. it is evident that the petitioner was conditions incorporated in Section 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. , 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 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 the jurisdictional Police Authorities (JAGMOHAN BANSAL) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No e from justice. She would join proceedings, if at any stage police report is Per contra, learned State counsel submits that there is onding during it is evident that the petitioner was conditions incorporated in Section As per Section 438(2)(iii) of Cr.P.C., the applicant cannot In view of the said f the Court. , the petitioner has undertaken that she would The filing of final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. has been stayed by this Court, thus, at present no 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 view of the jurisdictional Police Authorities (JAGMOHAN BANSAL) VIMAL KUMAR 2026.04.28 17:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document