Balvinder v. State Of Haryana And Another
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH Decided on : 03.07.2026 Balvinder . . . Appellant (s)
Versus
State of Haryana and another . . . Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH Present :
Mr. J.S. Jaidka, Advocate for the appellant(s).
Mr. Vipul Sherwal, AAG Haryana Mr. Rajesh Nain, Advocate for respondent No. 2 **** SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (Oral) 1.
Present appeal has been filed by the appellant, challenging the order dated 21.04.2026 passed by the Court of learned Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Faridabad, whereby regular bail petition filed by him, in case, FIR No.88 dated 12.03.2026, under Sections 79, 351(2), 3(5) of BNS (Earlier Sections 509, 506, 34 of IPC) and Section 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 at Police Station Faridabad Kotwali, District Faridabad, Haryana has been dismissed. 2.
In the alleged incident happened at 11.30 a.m. on 04.03.2025, complainant Savita, got registered the FIR against Balvinder, which reads as under:
"I, Savita W/o Parveen, resident of H. No. CJK 103, Shivala Colony, Faridabad, Faridabad, Haryana 121001. belong to the Scheduled Caste, specifically the Chamar Jatav community. I was married in the year 2014 to Parveen, who
belongs to the Punjabi community. The accused Balvinder Kaur and her family are of a quarrelsome nature. They frequently engage in fights and quarrels and file false cases. On 04/03/25 at 11:30 AM, on the day of Holi, my son threw water balloons from the rooftop into the street. Regarding this matter, Balvinder Kaur, her son Sagar, and her daughter Komal started hurling filthy abuses at my son and me. They said, "This Chamari, ever since she came here after marriage, she keeps coming out of the house. When I see this Chamari's face, my whole day gets ruined." They humiliate me on the basis of my caste, use filthy abuses against me, and give me death threats. She also says, "I will make you disappear from this street."
They also use filthy abuses against my husband and say to him, "You weren't getting married anywhere, you couldn't find any girl, that's why you married a Chamar woman." We also have some recordings of this, in which she is clearly humiliating [me] on the basis of caste in plain words. Balvinder's daughter Komal may file a false case against my husband. I have been humiliated on the basis of my caste and have been given death threats. Legal action should be taken against them and justice be delivered to me. Sd/- Savita. Applicant, Savita W/O Parveen, H. No. 2 CJK 103, Shivala Colony, Faridabad, Faridabad, Haryana 121001. Mobile Number: 7011254440 25410." 3.
Learned counsel for the appellant contends that appellant is a woman, who is suffering incarceration inside jail since 16.04.2026 and her any longer incarceration would not serve any meaningful purpose to the prosecution or even to the complainant. He further submits that in regard to the mis-behaviour of husband of the complainant, appellant-Balvinder had moved one complaint to the Police Post No. 2, NIT, Fardiabad prior in time and, therefore, with a purpose to arm twist the incident false FIR was registered against the appellant and other coaccused. During investigation, son and daughter of the appellant have been found innocent, though were also named in the FIR. He further submits that it is a case of no injury and, therefore, the appellant is entitled for bail. 4.
Learned State counsel and counsel for respondent No. 2, while opposing the prayer and submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant,
submit that appellant has used filthy words addressing the complainant and has dis-reputed her (complainant) in the Police Station i.e. public place. Learned State counsel also submits that there is video recording also of the incident, in which it has been clearly noticed that appellant has used filthy words while addressing the complainant in public place. 5.
This Court has heard the submissions advanced by learned counsel for both parties and has carefully perused the material available on record. 6.
No one in the present case has suffered any injury from either side. One complainant by the appellant had already been moved to the police authority, however, same can not be termed as an absolute reason for considering the plea of bail of the appellant but would carry some weigh for the said purpose. Whether the offence under SC/ST Act is actually made out, would be an issue before the trial Court after leading of the evidence and, therefore, keeping the appellant inside jail, who is woman having favourable privilege under Section 480 of BNSS need not to be kept inside jail any longer, rather keeping her inside jail may deteriorate her relations with the complainant in future also. 7.
In view of the totality of circumstances, nature of allegations, and the factors discussed hereinabove, this Court deems it just and appropriate to extend the concession of regular bail to the appellant. Consequently, prayer made in the present appeal is allowed. Appellant is ordered to be released on bail, subject to her furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/ Chief Judicial Magistrate/ Illaqa Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in any other case. 8.
Needless to observe that the appellant shall not extend any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witness in any manner directly or indirectly.
9.
Any of the discussion done and recorded here above, shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the facts of the case. Therefore, trial Court is expected to decide the case by taking an independent view, on the basis of evidence available on record, as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law. 10.
Appeal stands disposed of.
July 03, 2026 (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE reena Whether speaking/reasoned:
Yes/No Whether Reportable:
Yes/No