SHAHID ALIAS POLO ALIAS SAHID vs STATE OF HARYANA — CRM-M/20306/2026

Disposed: --DISMISSED on 13th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: PHHC010593602026

Filing Number

CRM-M/26626/2026

Filing Date

07-Apr-2026

Registration No

CRM-M/20306/2026

Registration Date

10-Apr-2026

Judge

Ms. Justice Rupinderjit Chahal

Coram

Ms. Justice Rupinderjit Chahal

Bench Type

Single

Category

99 ( 945 )

Sub-Category

40.2 - REGULAR BAIL (HARYANA) ( 219 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL BRANCH

Decision Date

13-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--DISMISSED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SHAHID ALIAS POLO ALIAS SAHID

    Adv. SARFARAJ ANJUM MOR

  2. 2.STATE OF HARYANA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF HARYANA

  2. 2.STATE OF HARYANA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 13-May-2026

    Ms. Justice Rupinderjit ChahalView PDF

    The Punjab & Haryana High Court dismissed Shahid's bail petition under Section 483 BNSS in a 2015 case involving alleged violence against police (stone-pelting and firing). The court found the allegations serious, noting the petitioner was declared a proclaimed offender in 2016, remained absconding for nine years, and is involved in 35 other criminal cases with four prior proclaimed offender declarations. The court rejected arguments that prolonged custody alone justifies bail, holding that the gravity of charges, criminal antecedents, and flight risk outweigh custody duration considerations. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 07-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRM-M/20306/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Punjab & Haryana High Court dismissed Shahid's bail petition under Section 483 BNSS in a 2015 case involving alleged violence against police (stone-pelting and firing). The court found the allegations serious, noting the petitioner was declared a proclaimed offender in 2016, remained absconding for nine years, and is involved in 35 other criminal cases with four prior proclaimed offender declarations. The court rejected arguments that prolonged custody alone justifies bail, holding that the gravity of charges, criminal antecedents, and flight risk outweigh custody duration considerations. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case