VISHAL vs STATE OF HARYANA — CRM-M/5345/2026
Disposed: --ALLOWED on 24th March 2026.
CNR: PHHC010144072026
Filing Number
CRM-M/3868/2026
Filing Date
27-Jan-2026
Registration No
CRM-M/5345/2026
Registration Date
29-Jan-2026
Judge
Mr. Justice Surya Partap Singh
Coram
Mr. Justice Surya Partap Singh
Bench Type
Single
Category
99 ( 945 )
Sub-Category
40.2 - REGULAR BAIL (HARYANA) ( 219 )
Judicial Branch
CRIMINAL BRANCH
Decision Date
24-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
--ALLOWED
Last updated 11-Apr-2026
Petitioner(s)
-
1.VISHAL
Adv. HIMMAT SINGH DEOL
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF HARYANA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
24-Mar-2026
Mr. Justice Surya Partap SinghView PDF
Case Summary: CRM-M-5345/2026 Decision: The High Court of Punjab & Haryana granted bail to petitioner Vishal, who was accused of murder and rioting in connection with a May 2022 incident in Gurugram. The court emphasized that the petitioner had been incarcerated for over three years with trial progressing slowly (only 16 of 27 prosecution witnesses examined), two eyewitnesses did not support the prosecution case, and similar co-accused had already received bail. Key Reasoning: Justice Surya Partap Singh applied Supreme Court principles holding that bail is the general rule and detention the exception, and that prolonged incarceration without speedy trial violates constitutional rights under Article 21. The court found no evidence the accused would tamper with evidence or evade trial if released. Conditions: Release on personal and surety bonds, with restrictions on witness contact, reporting address requirements, and prohibition on leaving India without court permission. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
27-Jan-2026
Case filed
Registration No. CRM-M/5345/2026
Case Summary: CRM-M-5345/2026 Decision: The High Court of Punjab & Haryana granted bail to petitioner Vishal, who was accused of murder and rioting in connection with a May 2022 incident in Gurugram. The court emphasized that the petitioner had been incarcerated for over three years with trial progressing slowly (only 16 of 27 prosecution witnesses examined), two eyewitnesses did not support the prosecution case, and similar co-accused had already received bail. Key Reasoning: Justice Surya Partap Singh applied Supreme Court principles holding that bail is the general rule and detention the exception, and that prolonged incarceration without speedy trial violates constitutional rights under Article 21. The court found no evidence the accused would tamper with evidence or evade trial if released. Conditions: Release on personal and surety bonds, with restrictions on witness contact, reporting address requirements, and prohibition on leaving India without court permission. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts