IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ****

235 CRM-M-60347-2025 (O&M)

Date of Decision : 10.02.2026 SANTOSH RANI ...Petitioner VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB ...Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE AARADHNA SAWHNEY Present: Mr. G.S. Ghuman, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Gautam Thapar, Sr. DAG, Punjab.

****

AARADHNA SAWHNEY, J. (ORAL)

1. This petition for grant of bail under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, has been filed by petitioner, an accused in case bearing FIR No.409 dated 05.12.2024 registered against her at Police Station City Kharar, District SAS Nagar, Mohali, for the commission of offences punishable u/s 115(2), 128(2), 151(2) of BNS (Section 124(1), 3(5) of BNS added later on).

2. Relevant facts emerging from documents on record be noticed hereinbelow:-

Teena, w/o Amit Kumar, set the criminal law in motion by filing a complaint pointing therein that she had been married to Amit Kumar (co-accused) in 2007. She and her husband are blessed with three daughters, one of whom was handed over to Anath Aashram without her consent. Complainant alleged that on account of birth of female children, she has been subjected to mental and physical cruelty/harassment, not only by her husband but her mother-in-law also. In this Context, she further pointed out that at about 07.OO PM on 25.11.2024, while she was in the kitchen, her mother-in-law picked up a quarrel with her on a minor issue. When her (C)

daughter tried to save her, her husband (co-accused Amit Kumar) walked in and at the instance of Santosh Rani (present petitioner, mother-in-law of complainant), her husband threw a pot of boiling water on her. She suffered serious burn injuries on her back. Primarily with this backdrop, she requested the police authorities to catch hold of her husband, as also her mother-in-law i.e. present petitioner and to initiate criminal proceedings against them.

On the basis of the said complaint and Medico Legal Report, a formal case vide FIR No.409 dated 05.12.2024, u/s 115(2), 128(2), 151(2) of BNS, was registered against the present petitioner and Amit Kumar. Offences being bailable, petitioner was initially released on bail.

During the course of investigation, statements of witnesses were recorded. Based on recommendation of District Attorney (Legal), Section 124(1)

(Section 326-A of IPC), 3(5) of BNS were added at a later stage.

3. Petitioner, who was arrested on 24.09.2025, moved an application for grant of bail before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, SAS Nagar. The same was dismissed vide order dated 03.10.2025. Aggrieved of the said order, the present petition has been filed.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that petitioner, an old lady of about 75 years of age, has been falsely implicated in the present case. Falsity of the case set up by the prosecution is apparent from the fact that there has been unexplained delay of 10 days in lodging the FIR. This intervening period, as per learned counsel, was misused by the complainant-party to twist the facts, a coloured version was presented in the complaint.

The next leg of submission raised by learned counsel for the petitioner is that if there had been an iota of truth in the allegations levelled by the complainant, that her husband and mother-in-law had been subjecting her to mental and physical cruelty on account of birth of females, there is nothing on record to suggest that she or her family members ever lodged complaint with the police officials or any Panchayat was convened to sort out the matrimonial discord. Further, as per medico legal report, the injuries so suffered by complainant have since been declared ‘Simple’ in nature also raise a question-

mark on the genuineness of story put forth by complainant.

It is further the submission of learned counsel that petitioner, an old lady of 75 years of age, who is not involved in any other case, and who has been in custody since 24.09.2025, deserves a lenient view to be taken in her favour, as the likelihood of completion of t