Panchkula: 81‑year‑old among five women denied anticipatory bail in Mansa Devi temple gold bangle theft case

Panchkula: 81‑year‑old among five women denied anticipatory bail in Mansa Devi temple gold bangle theft case

A local court in Panchkula has denied anticipatory bail to five women accused of stealing gold bangles from the Mansa Devi temple, including an 81‑year‑old resident of Sangrur.

The accused are Lachhmi Kaur, 81, from Sangrur; Kelo Kaur, 66, from Barnala; Mukhtiar Kaur, 64, from Sangrur; Karamjeet Kaur, 59, from Sangrur and known as Guddi; and Labhpreet Kaur, 37, from Sangrur and known as Reena. All five hail from Sangrur district, with the oldest being 81‑year‑old Lachhmi Kaur and the youngest 37‑year‑old Labhpreet Kaur.

Anticipatory bail applications are filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, allowing a person to seek pre‑emptive release if he or she believes that an arrest may be made without cause. The court examined the police report, the nature of the alleged theft, and the age of the accused, ultimately concluding that the suspicion of involvement was strong enough to deny bail.

The theft came to light after temple authorities reported missing gold ornaments, prompting a police investigation that identified the five individuals. The Mansa Devi temple, a prominent pilgrimage site, has been the focus of the investigation following reports of missing gold items.

Section 438 of the CrPC empowers individuals to apply for anticipatory bail before arrest, but the court must be satisfied that there is no reasonable apprehension that the accused will misuse the liberty granted. The denial does not preclude the possibility of regular bail later, but it signals that the investigation is considered robust.

Anticipatory bail is a procedural safeguard that allows a person to avoid arrest if the investigation does not indicate imminent risk. Judges consider factors such as the nature of the offence, the strength of evidence, and the age and health of the applicant when deciding on bail.

The Mansa Devi temple attracts large numbers of devotees, and the loss of gold ornaments has raised concerns among worshippers and temple management.

Incidents of theft at religious sites have been reported in the region, leading authorities to review security arrangements.

The case will continue to be heard in the coming weeks, with the prosecution preparing its evidence for the main hearing. The outcome will depend on the findings presented at trial.

The legal proceedings in such cases typically involve multiple stages, including the filing of a charge sheet, the presentation of evidence by the prosecution, and the opportunity for the defence to cross‑examine witnesses. The court may also consider any prior criminal record of the accused when assessing bail.

Mansa Devi temple, located on the outskirts of Panchkula, has been a centre of pilgrimage for decades and its wealth, including gold ornaments, has been a target for theft in the past.

Authorities have not disclosed the exact value of the stolen bangles, but the incident has prompted discussions on enhancing surveillance and inventory management within temple premises.

While the accused remain in custody pending the main hearing, they have the right to appeal the bail denial through higher courts.

The region has seen a series of theft cases involving valuable items at places of worship, underscoring the challenges of safeguarding cultural and religious assets.

The Mansa Devi temple case reflects broader concerns about security at heritage sites across the state, with officials indicating that periodic audits are being considered to prevent future losses.

The legal process will unfold over the next months, and the final verdict will determine the outcome for the accused.

Source: Hindustan Times