The Punjab and Haryana High Court has emphasized its dedication to safeguarding women's rights within the criminal justice system. Recently, in its ruling, the court emphasized the crucial need for courts to display increased empathy and understanding towards women, especially in matters concerning the restriction of their freedom.

The bench of Justice Harpreet Singh Brar's decision to grant anticipatory bail to a woman, who declared a proclaimed person in a cheque bounce case, coincided with this ruling. The state argued against the bail, citing the Supreme Court's precedent in cases such as "Lavesh versus State (NCT of Delhi)" and "Vipan Kumar Dhir versus State of Punjab and another," contending that the anticipatory bail was not maintainable in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court 

In his statement, Justice Brar highlighted that the Supreme Court had included a caveat specifying that "normally," anticipatory bail shouldn't be granted in cases where the accused was declared a proclaimed offender. He referred to the definition of 'normally' from Black’s Law dictionary, which defines it as "rule, regularly, according to rule, general custom," emphasizing the usual or standard practice in such situations as outlined by the Supreme Court.

The bench pointed out the consistent stance of the Supreme Court, emphasizing that depriving an individual of their life and liberty should strictly adhere to a lawful procedure. The court has consistently interpreted this procedure as one that is just, fair, and reasonable in its application.

'' The Indian Constitution not only guarantees women the right to equality but also empowers the state to take proactive measures in support of women through Article 15.''

Justice Brar said: “In light of the Constitutional scheme, special provisions have been made under Section 154, 160, 309, 357-B, 357-C and 437 of the CrPC to protect the rights of women. In keeping with the principles enshrined in the Constitution, the courts are required to be more empathetic and considerate towards women when the question of curtailment of liberty arises since it is not just the woman who suffers but so does her family.”

The judge added: “Many women who commit cognisable offenses are poor and illiterate. In many cases, they have children to take care of and there are many instances when the children have no other option but are to live in prisons with their mothers.”