SHYAM SUNDER vs STATE OF HARYANA — CRM-M/14958/2026

Disposed: --ALLOWED on 12th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: PHHC010456562026

Filing Number

CRM-M/19574/2026

Filing Date

16-Mar-2026

Registration No

CRM-M/14958/2026

Registration Date

17-Mar-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice Sanjay Vashisth

Coram

Mr. Justice Sanjay Vashisth

Bench Type

Single

Category

99 ( 945 )

Sub-Category

40.2 - REGULAR BAIL (HARYANA) ( 219 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL BRANCH

Decision Date

12-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--ALLOWED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SHYAM SUNDER

    Adv. DHEERAJ KUMAR NARULA

  2. 2.SHYAM SUNDER

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF HARYANA

  2. 2.SHYAM SUNDER

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 12-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Sanjay VashisthView PDF

    Case Summary: CRM-M/14958/2026 The High Court of Punjab and Haryana granted regular bail to petitioner Shyam Sunder, accused in an FIR for murder and conspiracy (Sections 148, 149, 302, 342, 379-B, 120-B IPC) involving the death of Naresh Kumar who suffered 15 injuries during a mob attack. The court found that while specific allegations exist against the petitioner, his incarceration since March 2025 combined with only one prosecution witness examined out of 22, and three co-accused already granted bail by the coordinate bench, warranted bail on parity grounds. The court emphasized this ruling does not prejudge the trial's merits and conditioned release on furnishing surety bonds and not threatening witnesses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 16-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRM-M/14958/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CRM-M/14958/2026 The High Court of Punjab and Haryana granted regular bail to petitioner Shyam Sunder, accused in an FIR for murder and conspiracy (Sections 148, 149, 302, 342, 379-B, 120-B IPC) involving the death of Naresh Kumar who suffered 15 injuries during a mob attack. The court found that while specific allegations exist against the petitioner, his incarceration since March 2025 combined with only one prosecution witness examined out of 22, and three co-accused already granted bail by the coordinate bench, warranted bail on parity grounds. The court emphasized this ruling does not prejudge the trial's merits and conditioned release on furnishing surety bonds and not threatening witnesses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case