REENA KUMARI vs STATE OF HARYANA — CRM-M/5634/2026

Disposed: --ALLOWED on 13th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: PHHC010166942026

Filing Number

CRM-M/4947/2026

Filing Date

30-Jan-2026

Registration No

CRM-M/5634/2026

Registration Date

30-Jan-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice Sanjay Vashisth

Coram

Mr. Justice Sanjay Vashisth

Bench Type

Single

Category

99 ( 945 )

Sub-Category

39 - ANTICIPATORY BAILS ( 144 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL BRANCH

Decision Date

13-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--ALLOWED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.REENA KUMARI

    Adv. SANDEEP GORSI

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF HARYANA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 13-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Sanjay VashisthView PDF

    Summary: CRM-M/5634/2026 The Punjab & Haryana High Court granted absolute anticipatory bail to petitioner Reena Kumari in FIR No. 231 (Sections 406 and 420 IPC, Karnal), holding that she was initially found innocent in the investigation challan against co-accused Rajneesh Kumar. The court declined to subject the female petitioner to custodial interrogation but directed her to continue joining investigation as required and surrender her passport. The court also directed the investigating officer to file an affidavit explaining why proceedings were re-initiated against the petitioners despite their exoneration in the original report. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 30-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRM-M/5634/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: CRM-M/5634/2026 The Punjab & Haryana High Court granted absolute anticipatory bail to petitioner Reena Kumari in FIR No. 231 (Sections 406 and 420 IPC, Karnal), holding that she was initially found innocent in the investigation challan against co-accused Rajneesh Kumar. The court declined to subject the female petitioner to custodial interrogation but directed her to continue joining investigation as required and surrender her passport. The court also directed the investigating officer to file an affidavit explaining why proceedings were re-initiated against the petitioners despite their exoneration in the original report. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case