Chandigarh, November 30, 2025 – Kanchanpreet Kaur, daughter of Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) leader Sukhwinder Kaur Randhawa, was released early Sunday morning following a court order from Tarn Taran. The hearing in her case, which involved allegations linked to intimidation during a recent bypoll, stretched late into the night, lasting past midnight and concluding in the early hours of Sunday.

The release comes amid a politically charged atmosphere, with the SAD alleging that the arrest was part of a political vendetta by the ruling party in Punjab.

Arrest and Court Proceedings

Kanchanpreet was initially arrested by the Chabhal police station in Tarn Taran on Friday, November 29, in connection with an FIR registered on November 11. The FIR alleged intimidation during the Tarn Taran bypoll, in which her mother, Sukhwinder Kaur Randhawa, had contested but lost to an A-party candidate.

The police added a non-bailable Section 111 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita to the FIR to facilitate her arrest. She was also facing four other poll-related cases in which she had already secured anticipatory bail. The police sought a 10-day remand for Kanchanpreet to further investigate her alleged involvement.

Her counsel, Arshdeep Singh Kler, head of the SAD legal cell, moved swiftly to challenge the arrest, arguing that it was illegal and unconstitutional. He emphasized that Kanchanpreet had no active role in the incident attributed to her husband, Amritpal Singh Bath, who had been named in 23 FIRs in connection with the bypoll.

High Court Intervention

On Saturday, Kler approached the Punjab and Haryana High Court, seeking relief against the arrest. The state counsel, Chanchal K Singla, opposed the petition, asserting that Kanchanpreet’s involvement came to light due to her association with Bath.

The High Court bench, presided over by Justice Rajesh Bhardwaj, directed the magistrate to consider the arguments presented by the petitioner’s counsel before taking any decision on the police remand. The HC further allowed Kler to personally appear before the Tarn Taran court to argue the case, instructing that Kanchanpreet be kept in court custody until submissions were made.

Overnight Hearing

Kanchanpreet was produced before the Tarn Taran court on Saturday night. The hearing commenced around 10 pmand extended past 1 am, reflecting the intensity of arguments over the legality of her arrest and the appropriateness of the police’s actions.

During the hearing, Kler contended that the arrest violated constitutional provisions and questioned the police’s procedural conduct, highlighting that Kanchanpreet had already obtained anticipatory bail in related cases. The court, after careful consideration of the submissions and reviewing the facts, struck down the non-bailable offence registered against her, leading to her release at around 4 am on Sunday.

Political Context

The case has drawn attention not only for its legal intricacies but also for the political dynamics surrounding the Tarn Taran bypolls. Sukhwinder Kaur Randhawa, Kanchanpreet’s mother, had contested the by-election as an Akali leader and narrowly lost to a candidate from the ruling party. The SAD leadership has alleged that the FIR against Kanchanpreet was motivated by political vendetta, aimed at intimidating opposition members and their families.

The political overtones were further underscored by the inclusion of multiple sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, including Sections 174, 351, 111, among others, which are generally invoked in cases involving public mischief or intimidation. Critics argue that these provisions were applied disproportionately in this instance, targeting Kanchanpreet due to her family connections.

Legal Arguments and Court Findings

The court hearing focused extensively on the constitutionality of the arrest and whether the police action complied with procedural safeguards. Kler argued that there was no credible evidence implicating Kanchanpreet directly in the alleged intimidation incident and that her arrest was unwarranted and politically motivated.

The court also considered the nature of her involvement in comparison to her husband’s alleged actions. While Bath had been linked to 23 FIRs, Kanchanpreet’s direct participation was unclear, leading the magistrate to question the grounds for a non-bailable arrest.

The High Court’s earlier directive ensured that the court carefully evaluated Kler’s submissions before granting police remand, a move that ultimately contributed to the favorable outcome for Kanchanpreet. The verdict highlights the judiciary’s role in upholding procedural fairness even amidst politically sensitive cases.

Response from the Akali Dal

Following Kanchanpreet’s release, SAD leaders described the arrest as part of a systematic effort to intimidate opposition members. They criticized the police for what they termed excessive use of legal provisions and for seeking an extended remand without adequate justification.

Speaking to the media in Tarn Taran, Kler reiterated that the court had acknowledged the unconstitutional nature of the arrest and questioned the overall police action. He emphasized that Kanchanpreet had been unfairly implicated and that her legal rights were upheld through the intervention of the High Court and the magistrate’s careful deliberation.

Implications for Political Climate

The incident has intensified scrutiny of law enforcement practices in politically charged scenarios, particularly in the context of elections. Analysts note that high-profile arrests during election periods can influence public perception, voter behavior, and political narratives, often blurring the line between legal action and political strategy.

The case also underscores the importance of judicial oversight in preventing misuse of legal provisions. By ensuring that Kanchanpreet’s arrest was thoroughly examined and ultimately overturned, the courts have reinforced the principle that individual rights must be protected regardless of political affiliation or family connections.

Conclusion

Kanchanpreet Kaur’s release following the overnight hearing in Tarn Taran marks the culmination of a tense legal and political episode. The case, rooted in allegations of intimidation during the bypoll, brought attention to the interplay of law, politics, and electoral processes in Punjab.

While the police action initially sought to detain Kanchanpreet under stringent non-bailable provisions, the court’s intervention emphasized procedural fairness and constitutional safeguards. The SAD has framed the episode as a political vendetta, while legal observers note the judiciary’s decisive role in ensuring that due process prevails.

As Kanchanpreet resumes her life following her release, the incident is likely to remain a talking point in Punjab’s political discourse, highlighting the sensitivity of election-related legal cases and the delicate balance between law enforcement and political neutrality.