Amarjit Kaur v. State Of Punjab

CRM-M-32759-2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH (269) CRM-M-32759-2025 Date of Decision:- 30.07.2025 Amarjit Kaur ......Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ......Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK JAIN ****

Present:

Mr. B.D. Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Sahil Chowdhary, AAG, Punjab.

**** ALOK JAIN, J. (Oral) 1.

The present petition has been filed seeking quashing of impugned order dated 09.06.2025 passed by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Amritsar (Annexure P-4), whereby, the application of the petitioner for grant of permission to visit abroad i.e. Edmonton, State of Alberta, Canada for a period of six months to take care of her pregnant daughter-in-law has been dismissed.

2.

In furtherance to the order dated 01.07.2025, learned State counsel has filed the short reply by way of an affidavit of Kanwalpreet Singh, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, NRI Wing, District Amritsar on behalf of respondent-State in Court today, which is taken on record, subject to all just exceptions.

PARUL 2025.08.04 11:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

CRM-M-32759-2025 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner wants to visit Canada as her second daughter-in-law i.e. the wife of younger son who is an expecting mother and therefore, the petitioner wishes to visit Canada for a period of six months to take care of her daughter-in-law.

4.

Learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the present prayer on the ground that serious allegations have been levelled against the petitioner and more so, the son of the petitioner is already absconding. The present petitioner had also joined investigation only when LOC notice was issued against her and therefore, there is every likelihood of the petitioner to abscond from the process of law.

5.

In the given set of circumstances, especially when the son of the petitioner who is also a co-accused, is already absconding and is in a foreign land and by going through the averments that the second son of the petitioner is also well settled in Canada, there is every likelihood that the petitioner would never return to face the trial in the proceedings. 6.

Accordingly, finding no merit in the present petition and the same stands dismissed.

(ALOK JAIN) JUDGE 30.07.2025 Parul Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether Reportable:- Yes/No PARUL 2025.08.04 11:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document