DHARMENDER KUMAR vs STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER — CRA-S/810/2026

Disposed: --ALLOWED on 15th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: PHHC010404122026

Filing Number

CRA-S/16820/2026

Filing Date

09-Mar-2026

Registration No

CRA-S/810/2026

Registration Date

09-Mar-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice Surya Partap Singh

Coram

Mr. Justice Surya Partap Singh

Bench Type

Single

Category

36.48-CRIMINAL APPEALS U/S 14A UNDER SC/ST ACT,1989 SEEKING REGULAR BAILS-GENERAL ( 1427 )

Sub-Category

( 944 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL BRANCH

Decision Date

15-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--ALLOWED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.DHARMENDER KUMAR

    Adv. SANDEEP KUMAR RANA

  2. 2.STATE OF HARYANA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER

  2. 2.STATE OF HARYANA

  3. 3.MEENA KANWAR

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 15-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Surya Partap SinghView PDF

    Case Summary: CRA-S/810/2026 The High Court of Punjab and Haryana allowed Dharmender Kumar's criminal appeal and granted him bail in an SC & ST Act atrocities case. The court found that Kumar had been incarcerated for over four months without trial commencement, that specific allegations against him lacked detail (particularly regarding exact words used and witness presence), and that his co-accused had already received bail. The court determined there was no evidence Kumar would tamper with evidence or flee, making continued detention unjustified. Kumar was released on bail with conditions including non-interference with witnesses and travel restrictions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 09-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRA-S/810/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CRA-S/810/2026 The High Court of Punjab and Haryana allowed Dharmender Kumar's criminal appeal and granted him bail in an SC & ST Act atrocities case. The court found that Kumar had been incarcerated for over four months without trial commencement, that specific allegations against him lacked detail (particularly regarding exact words used and witness presence), and that his co-accused had already received bail. The court determined there was no evidence Kumar would tamper with evidence or flee, making continued detention unjustified. Kumar was released on bail with conditions including non-interference with witnesses and travel restrictions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case