KANHAIYA ALIAS KHANIYA vs STATE OF PUNJAB — CRM-M/26489/2026

Disposed: --ALLOWED on 15th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: PHHC010784572026

Filing Number

CRM-M/36542/2026

Filing Date

07-May-2026

Registration No

CRM-M/26489/2026

Registration Date

08-May-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice Sumeet Goel

Coram

Mr. Justice Sumeet Goel

Category

99 ( 945 )

Sub-Category

40.1 - REGULAR BAIL (PUNJAB) ( 220 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL BRANCH

Decision Date

15-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--ALLOWED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.KANHAIYA ALIAS KHANIYA

    Adv. MONTY GOYAL

  2. 2.STATE OF PUNJAB

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF PUNJAB

  2. 2.STATE OF PUNJAB

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 15-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Sumeet GoelView PDF

    Case Summary: CRM-M/26489/2026 The Punjab and Haryana High Court granted regular bail to Kanhaiya (petitioner) in a murder case involving the death of Ajay Kumar during an alleged group attack in Ludhiana. Though charged with serious offences including murder (IPC §302), the court found that after 2 years 11 days of incarceration, no evidence suggested the petitioner would abscond or tamper with evidence, and the prime prosecution witness had turned hostile, weakening the prosecution's case. The court imposed strict bail conditions including passport deposit, mobile phone monitoring, non-interference with evidence, and regular court appearances, while clarifying this decision expressed no opinion on case merits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 07-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRM-M/26489/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CRM-M/26489/2026 The Punjab and Haryana High Court granted regular bail to Kanhaiya (petitioner) in a murder case involving the death of Ajay Kumar during an alleged group attack in Ludhiana. Though charged with serious offences including murder (IPC §302), the court found that after 2 years 11 days of incarceration, no evidence suggested the petitioner would abscond or tamper with evidence, and the prime prosecution witness had turned hostile, weakening the prosecution's case. The court imposed strict bail conditions including passport deposit, mobile phone monitoring, non-interference with evidence, and regular court appearances, while clarifying this decision expressed no opinion on case merits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case