UMED SINGH vs STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER — CRM-M/47320/2025

Disposed: --ALLOWED on 24th March 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: PHHC011368762025

Filing Number

CRM-M/71768/2025

Filing Date

26-Aug-2025

Registration No

CRM-M/47320/2025

Registration Date

26-Aug-2025

Judge

Ms. Justice Kirti Singh

Coram

Ms. Justice Kirti Singh

Bench Type

Single

Category

99 ( 945 )

Sub-Category

39.13 - ANTICIPATORY BAIL (AGNST WOMEN) ( 285 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL BRANCH

Decision Date

24-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

--ALLOWED

Last updated 11-Apr-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.UMED SINGH

    Adv. MANVENDER SINGH DALAL

  2. 2.UMED SINGH

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER

  2. 2.UMED SINGH

  3. 3.SONIA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 24-Mar-2026

    Ms. Justice Kirti SinghView PDF

    Case Summary: CRM-M/47320/2025 The Punjab & Haryana High Court granted anticipatory bail to Umed Singh in FIR No. 236 (Sadar Pehowa, Kurukshetra) involving charges under BNS Sections 76, 115, 85, 117, and 35, after the matter was amicably settled between the petitioner and complainant. The court directed the petitioner to join investigation with conditions including availability for interrogation, non-interference with witnesses, and no foreign travel without permission. The investigating officer confirmed compliance, and the petition was allowed as a case-specific order not granting blanket protection. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 26-Aug-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRM-M/47320/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CRM-M/47320/2025 The Punjab & Haryana High Court granted anticipatory bail to Umed Singh in FIR No. 236 (Sadar Pehowa, Kurukshetra) involving charges under BNS Sections 76, 115, 85, 117, and 35, after the matter was amicably settled between the petitioner and complainant. The court directed the petitioner to join investigation with conditions including availability for interrogation, non-interference with witnesses, and no foreign travel without permission. The investigating officer confirmed compliance, and the petition was allowed as a case-specific order not granting blanket protection. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case