Disposed¶22

Anil @ Abid v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC23 Mar 2026CRM-M/2675/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anil @ Abid v. State of Haryana; CRM-M-2675-2026; High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh; Aaradhna Sawhney, J. (oral); decided 23.03.2026; speedy trial direction — trial to conclude within 2 months, latest by 30.05.2026; bail petition disposed of without adverting to merits; complainant not supporting prosecution; 10 of 14 prosecution witnesses examined; petitioner absented twice after earlier bail grants; questionable antecedents per status report of Rajbir Singh, DSP City Panipat; State counsel Vishal Singh, AAG; petitioner's counsel Shivani Jaglan.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the trial Court to make sincere efforts to conclude the trial within 2 months from the date of the order, latest by 30.05.2026, in accordance with law; the bail plea was not adjudicated on merits. ¶22

Anil @ Abid Vs State of Haryana — Punjab & Haryana HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

CRM-M-2675-2026

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

225

¶5

CRM-M-2675-2026 Date of decision: 23.03.2026

Anil @ Abid

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana ...Respondent

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE AARADHNA SAWHNEY

¶11

Present : Ms. Shivani Jaglan, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶12

Mr. Vishal Singh, AAG, Haryana.

¶13

¶14

AARADHNA SAWHNEY, J.(ORAL)

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further her submission that since the complainant, at whose behest the proceedings were initiated, has not supported the case of the prosecution, further incarceration of petitioner would not serve any useful purpose.

¶16

Status report by way of an affidavit of Mr. Rajbir Singh, HPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, City Panipat has been placed on record, wherein it has been pointed out that twice the petitioner was granted the concession of bail but after attending the Court proceedings for some time, he absented on two occasions. Learned State counsel has also referred to the questionable past antecedents of the petitioner as stand highlighted in para 6 of the said report.

¶17

During the course of submissions, it has also been pointed out in para 3(ii) of the said report that out of 14 cited prosecution witnesses, 10 have already been examined.

¶18

Without adverting to the merits of the case, considering the fact

¶19

HAMANT 2026.03.24 14:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶20

CRM-M-2675-2026

¶21

¶22

that the trial is at fag end, the instant petition is disposed of with a direction to the trial Court to make sincere efforts to conclude the trial within a period of 2 months from today, latest by 30.05.2026, in accordance with law.

¶23

(AARADHNA SAWHNEY) JUDGE

¶24

23.03.2026
Hemant
	Whether speaking/reasoned	: Yes	/ No
	Whether reportable	: Yes	/ No

¶25

HAMANT 2026.03.24 14:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Anil @ Abid v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anil @ Abid v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohd. Sahil Vs State of Haryana

Sukhwinder Singh Alias Laddi Vs State of Punjab

Sujal Vs State of Punjab

Meharwan Singh Vs State of Punjab

Jagir Masih @ Kali Vs State of Punjab

Pariminder Singh Vs State of Punjab and Another