SUNIL vs STATE OF HARYANA — CRM-M/25378/2026

Disposed: --ALLOWED on 11th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: PHHC010758012026

Filing Number

CRM-M/35187/2026

Filing Date

04-May-2026

Registration No

CRM-M/25378/2026

Registration Date

04-May-2026

Judge

Mrs. Justice Manisha Batra

Coram

Mrs. Justice Manisha Batra

Category

99 ( 945 )

Sub-Category

40.2 - REGULAR BAIL (HARYANA) ( 219 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL BRANCH

Decision Date

11-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--ALLOWED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SUNIL

    Adv. S.K. BISHNOI

  2. 2.SUNIL

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF HARYANA

  2. 2.SUNIL

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 11-May-2026

    Mrs. Justice Manisha BatraView PDF

    The High Court of Punjab & Haryana granted regular bail to petitioner Sunil in a case involving unlawful assembly and assault charges. The court found that while Sunil was implicated based on a co-accused's disclosure statement, he was not named in the original FIR and no specific injury was attributed to him. Considering investigation completion, extended trial duration, and parity with similarly situated co-accused already granted bail, the court ordered his release on personal/surety bonds, applying the principle that bail is the rule and detention should not replicate post-conviction sentencing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 04-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRM-M/25378/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Punjab & Haryana granted regular bail to petitioner Sunil in a case involving unlawful assembly and assault charges. The court found that while Sunil was implicated based on a co-accused's disclosure statement, he was not named in the original FIR and no specific injury was attributed to him. Considering investigation completion, extended trial duration, and parity with similarly situated co-accused already granted bail, the court ordered his release on personal/surety bonds, applying the principle that bail is the rule and detention should not replicate post-conviction sentencing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case