ROBIN KHAN vs STATE OF HARYANA — CRM-M/21323/2026

Disposed: --ALLOWED on 11th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: PHHC010625392026

Filing Number

CRM-M/28330/2026

Filing Date

16-Apr-2026

Registration No

CRM-M/21323/2026

Registration Date

17-Apr-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice Surya Partap Singh

Coram

Mr. Justice Surya Partap Singh

Bench Type

Single

Category

40.2 - REGULAR BAIL (HARYANA) ( 219 )

Sub-Category

( 944 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL BRANCH

Decision Date

11-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--ALLOWED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.ROBIN KHAN

    Adv. RAHUL DESWAL

  2. 2.ROBIN KHAN

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF HARYANA

  2. 2.ROBIN KHAN

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 11-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Surya Partap SinghView PDF

    CASE SUMMARY: CRM-M/21323/2026 The Punjab & Haryana High Court granted bail to Robin Khan, accused in a cyber fraud case involving ₹43 lakhs loss. The court found that the sole evidence against Khan was a co-accused's police custody disclosure statement, which lacks credibility under Section 23 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (no recovery followed), Khan received no crime proceeds, investigation was complete, and he had spent 4 months 27 days in custody with clean antecedents. Applying principles on speedy trial rights and bail as the general rule, the court allowed bail on personal and surety bonds with conditions prohibiting witness tampering, requiring address notification, and restricting foreign travel. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 16-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRM-M/21323/2026

casestatus.in Summary

CASE SUMMARY: CRM-M/21323/2026 The Punjab & Haryana High Court granted bail to Robin Khan, accused in a cyber fraud case involving ₹43 lakhs loss. The court found that the sole evidence against Khan was a co-accused's police custody disclosure statement, which lacks credibility under Section 23 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (no recovery followed), Khan received no crime proceeds, investigation was complete, and he had spent 4 months 27 days in custody with clean antecedents. Applying principles on speedy trial rights and bail as the general rule, the court allowed bail on personal and surety bonds with conditions prohibiting witness tampering, requiring address notification, and restricting foreign travel. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case