ANSHUL SAINI vs STATE OF HARYANA — CRM-M/27817/2026

Disposed: --ALLOWED on 15th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: PHHC010798802026

Filing Number

CRM-M/37300/2026

Filing Date

08-May-2026

Registration No

CRM-M/27817/2026

Registration Date

14-May-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice Surya Partap Singh

Coram

Mr. Justice Surya Partap Singh

Bench Type

Single

Category

99 ( 945 )

Sub-Category

40.2 - REGULAR BAIL (HARYANA) ( 219 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL BRANCH

Decision Date

15-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--ALLOWED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.ANSHUL SAINI

    Adv. VIKRAM RANA

  2. 2.STATE OF HARYANA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF HARYANA

  2. 2.STATE OF HARYANA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 15-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Surya Partap SinghView PDF

    Case Summary: CRM-M No. 27817/2026 The Punjab and Haryana High Court granted bail to Anshul Saini in a violent assault case. The petitioner had been in custody for over six months; his name did not appear in the original FIR and he was implicated solely based on a co-accused's disclosure statement. The court found the investigation complete, noted questionable evidentiary value of the disclosure statement, and that complainants failed to appear for examination despite service. Applying Supreme Court precedents emphasizing bail as the general rule and the right to speedy trial, the court released him on personal and surety bonds with standard conditions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 08-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRM-M/27817/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CRM-M No. 27817/2026 The Punjab and Haryana High Court granted bail to Anshul Saini in a violent assault case. The petitioner had been in custody for over six months; his name did not appear in the original FIR and he was implicated solely based on a co-accused's disclosure statement. The court found the investigation complete, noted questionable evidentiary value of the disclosure statement, and that complainants failed to appear for examination despite service. Applying Supreme Court precedents emphasizing bail as the general rule and the right to speedy trial, the court released him on personal and surety bonds with standard conditions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case