Allowed¶8

Rahul v. Ravinder @ Ravi and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC9 Apr 2026CRM-A/2682/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CRM-A-2682-2019; Rahul v. Ravinder @ Ravi and Ors.; leave to appeal against acquittal dated 03.12.2018; main appeal admitted; post-admission notice; attendance bond within two months; personal bond Rs. 10,000 and one surety Rs. 10,000; Trial Court/Duty Magistrate; order dated 09.04.2026; Judge Anoop Chitkara; Advocate Randeep Singh for applicant; no appearance for respondents.

What did the court decide?

Leave to appeal granted and main appeal admitted; accused-respondents directed to execute bonds for attendance within two months, furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 10,000 and one surety of Rs. 10,000 to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court/Duty Magistrate, with an undertaking to appear before this Court if the appeal is allowed; Registry to issue post-admission notice and communicate the order to the trial Court. ¶8

Rahul Vs Ravinder @ Ravi and Ors. — Punjab & Haryana HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶8

Issue for consideration

Whether leave to appeal should be granted to the complainant against the judgment of acquittal dated 03.12.2018. +1 more

¶7

Court's answer

Leave to appeal against the judgment of acquittal dated 03.12.2018 is granted.

¶8

Ratio / Principle

The main appeal is admitted and the Registry is to issue post-admission notice to the respondents.

¶13

Key takeaways

The accused-respondents shall furnish a personal bond of Rs. 10,000 and one surety of Rs. 10,000 to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court/Duty Magistrate, executing a bond for attendance within two months with an undertaking to appear before this Court if the appeal is allowed; the concerned Court must satisfy itself that the surety can produce the accused if they fail to appear.ratio¶15
Furnishing of the personal bonds shall be deemed acceptance of all stipulations, terms and conditions of this bail order.ratio¶16

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Order dated 09.04.2026 (Judge: Anoop Chitkara): The Court granted leave to appeal to complainant Rahul against the judgment of acquittal dated 03.12.2018 passed in respect of respondents Ravinder @ Ravi and others, after counsel for the complainant submitted that there was no appreciation of evidence in the acquittal judgment and sufficient evidence existed for conviction. The main appeal was admitted, the Registry was directed to assign a number and issue post-admission notice to the respondents, and the accused-respondents were required to execute bonds for attendance within two months, furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 10,000 and one surety of Rs. 10,000 to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court/Duty Magistrate, with an undertaking to appear before the Court if the appeal is allowed; furnishing of the bonds was deemed acceptance of all stipulations, terms and conditions of the order.

¶1

204 CRM-A-2682-2019 RAHUL VS. RAVINDER @ RAVI AND ORS.

¶2

Present: Mr. Randeep Singh, Advocate the applicant.

¶3

None for the respondents.

¶4

¶5

CRM-A-2682-2019

¶6

None has appeared on behalf of the respondents.

¶7

Counsel for the complainant submits that he has a very good case on merit and there is sufficient evidence on record which is sufficient for convic#on of respondents. There is no apprecia#on of evidence in judgment of acqui'al dated 03.12.2018.

¶8

Leave to appeal granted.

¶9

Registry to assign number to appeal.

Main appeal

Heard.

Admi'ed.

Registry to issue post admission no#ce to the respondents.

¶14

The accused i.e. respondents to execute a bond for a'endance within two months, undertaking to appear in this Court, in case appeal is allowed.

¶15

Given above, the accused-respondents shall furnish a personal bond of Rs. Ten Thousand only (INR 10,000/-), and furnish one surety for Rs. Ten thousand only (INR 10,000/-), to the sa#sfac#on of the concerned Trial Court/Duty Magistrate. Before accep#ng the sure#es, the concerned Court must sa#sfy that if the accused fails to appear in Court, then such surety is capable of producing them before the Court.

¶16

The furnishing of the personal bonds shall be deemed acceptance of the all s#pula#ons, terms, and condi#ons of this bail order.

¶17

Registry to communicate this order to the trial Court without any delay. In case of failure of respondents to furnish bond, the concerned Court shall proceed further in accordance with law.

¶18

There would be no need for a cer�fied copy of this order for furnishing bonds, and any Advocate for the accused can download this order along with case status from the official web page of this Court and a�est it to be a true copy. In case the a�es�ng officer wants to verify the authen�city, such an officer can also verify its authen�city and may download and use the downloaded copy for a�es�ng bonds.

¶19

(ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE

¶20

09.04.2026

¶21

JYOTI2026.04.10 09:17 Jyo�-II I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

Rahul v. Ravinder @ Ravi and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul v. Ravinder @ Ravi and Ors.

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

Parminder Kaur Vs Niranjan Singh

Natha Singh Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Veeru Vs State of Punjab and Others

Laxman Dass Vs State of Haryana and Others

Jaspreet Singh Vs M/S Saharan Commission Agent, Fazilka

Pardeep Vohra Vs State of Haryana and Another