AARIF vs STATE OF HARYANA — CRM-M/14627/2026
Disposed: --ALLOWED on 21st April 2026.
CNR: PHHC010431682026
Filing Number
CRM-M/18316/2026
Filing Date
12-03-2026
Registration No
CRM-M/14627/2026
Registration Date
13-03-2026
Judge
MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL
Coram
MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL
Bench Type
Single
Category
99 ( 945 )
Sub-Category
40.2 - REGULAR BAIL (HARYANA) ( 219 )
Judicial Branch
CRIMINAL BRANCH
Decision Date
21st April 2026
Nature of Disposal
--ALLOWED
Petitioner(s)
AARIF
Adv. ANAS AHMED
AARIF
Respondent(s)
STATE OF HARYANA
AARIF
Orders
Case Summary: CRM-M/14627/2026 The High Court of Punjab and Haryana granted regular bail to petitioner Aarif, who had been in custody for approximately 8 months and 29 days on charges including attempted murder, kidnapping, and criminal intimidation (FIR No.252, July 2025). Justice Sumeet Goel found that while only 5 of 20 prosecution witnesses had been examined and the trial was in early stages, there was no evidence suggesting the petitioner would abscond or tamper with evidence. The court held that prior criminal antecedents alone cannot bar bail when circumstances of the specific FIR warrant release. Bail was granted subject to standard conditions including appearance at trial, no tampering with evidence, and deposit of passport. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: CRM-M/14627/2026 The High Court of Punjab and Haryana granted regular bail to petitioner Aarif, who had been in custody for approximately 8 months and 29 days on charges including attempted murder, kidnapping, and criminal intimidation (FIR No.252, July 2025). Justice Sumeet Goel found that while only 5 of 20 prosecution witnesses had been examined and the trial was in early stages, there was no evidence suggesting the petitioner would abscond or tamper with evidence. The court held that prior criminal antecedents alone cannot bar bail when circumstances of the specific FIR warrant release. Bail was granted subject to standard conditions including appearance at trial, no tampering with evidence, and deposit of passport. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts