WASEEM ALIAS WASEEM AKRAM AND ANOTHER vs STATE OF HARYANA — CRM-M/14897/2026
Disposed: --ALLOWED on 21st April 2026.
CNR: PHHC010433542026
Filing Number
CRM-M/18369/2026
Filing Date
12-03-2026
Registration No
CRM-M/14897/2026
Registration Date
16-03-2026
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)
WASEEM ALIAS WASEEM AKRAM AND ANOTHER
Adv. JAMSHED AHMED
WASEEM @ WASEEM AKRAM
AASIF
Respondent(s)
STATE OF HARYANA
WASEEM @ WASEEM AKRAM
Orders
Case Summary: CRM-M/14897/2026 The High Court of Punjab and Haryana granted regular bail to the petitioners (Waseem and Aasif) on April 21, 2026, who had been in custody since September 30, 2025 (over 6 months) in an FIR involving allegations of violent assault at a madrasa in District Nuh. The court found that while 20 prosecution witnesses were cited, only 5 had been examined, indicating trial would extend considerably, and no evidence suggested the petitioners would abscond or tamper with evidence. The court noted that prior hostile witnesses and prolonged incarceration without substantial trial progress constituted substantial changed circumstances warranting bail despite this being a second bail petition and the seriousness of allegations. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: CRM-M/14897/2026 The High Court of Punjab and Haryana granted regular bail to the petitioners (Waseem and Aasif) on April 21, 2026, who had been in custody since September 30, 2025 (over 6 months) in an FIR involving allegations of violent assault at a madrasa in District Nuh. The court found that while 20 prosecution witnesses were cited, only 5 had been examined, indicating trial would extend considerably, and no evidence suggested the petitioners would abscond or tamper with evidence. The court noted that prior hostile witnesses and prolonged incarceration without substantial trial progress constituted substantial changed circumstances warranting bail despite this being a second bail petition and the seriousness of allegations. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts