Allowed

Sheejal Alias Seejal Alias Nagma v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC13 Jul 2026CRM-M/3866/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana granted regular bail to the petitioner under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 in a case involving culpable homicide resulting from the death of the victim due to myocardial infarction. The court held that as the petitioner is a first-time offender in custody and the trial is unlikely to conclude soon, further incarceration is not required.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner Sheejal alias Seejal alias Nagma released on bail subject to furnishing bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned CJM/Duty Magistrate.

Sheejal Alias Seejal Alias Nagma Vs State of Haryana — Bail and Remand | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

¶1

CRM-M-3866-2026 -1-

¶2

(221)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRM-M-3866-2026 Date of Decision: 13.07.2026

¶5

SHEEJAL ALIAS SEEJAL ALIAS NAGMA

Versus

STATE OF HARYANA

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI

¶10

Present: Mr. P.S. Jammu, Advocate with Mr. R.K. Poonia, Advocate Mr. B.K. Bhardwaj, Advocate Mr. Gaurav Luhani, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶11

Mr. T.P. Singh, Sr. DAG, Haryana. ****

¶12

JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J.

¶13

The prayer in the present petition under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 is for the grant of regular bail in case bearing FIR No.232 dated 24.04.2024 (Annexure P-1) registered under Sections 304, 323, 506, 34 IPC (Section 302 IPC converted into 304 IPC) at Police Station Old Industrial, District Panipat.

¶14

The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the FIR has been registered under Section 302 IPC. Later, the challan was submitted under Section 304 IPC as the deceased Fateh Singh has died on account of a heart condition and not due to the injury suffered by him which are simple in nature. In fact, the CCTV footage of the occurrence would reveal that there

¶15

JITESH LAL 2026.07.13 18:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶16

CRM-M-3866-2026 -2-

¶17

was merely a scuffle between the parties. The primary accused is Raman Kumar alias Aman (brother of the petitioner). As the petitioner is a lady, in custody since 25.04.2024 but only 10 of the 17 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far, the Trial of the present case is not likely to be concluded anytime soon and therefore, she is entitled to the concession of bail.

¶18

The learned State counsel while referring to the reply dated 14.03.2026 contends that the cause of death was myocardial infarction as per the report of the histopathologist. Therefore, the offence was converted to 304 IPC. He concedes that the petitioner is in custody since 25.04.2024 but only 10 of the 17 of the prosecution witnesses have been examined so far.

¶19

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶20

The veracity of the prosecution case against the petitioner and her co-accused shall be adjudicated upon during the course of the Trial. Admittedly, the petitioner is a first-time offender, in custody since 25.04.2024 but only 10 of the 17 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far. Therefore, the Trial of the present case is not likely to be concluded anytime soon. In this situation the further incarceration of the petitioner is not required.

¶21

Thus without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner-Sheejal alias Seejal alias Nagma W/o Shamseer is ordered to be released on bail subject to her furnishing bail bonds

¶22

JITESH LAL 2026.07.13 18:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶23

CRM-M-3866-2026 -3-

¶24

and surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned CJM/Duty Magistrate, concerned.

¶25

The petition stands disposed of.

¶26

(JASJIT SINGH BEDI) JUDGE

¶27

13.07.2026 JITESH Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether reportable:Yes/No

¶28

JITESH LAL 2026.07.13 18:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Sheejal Alias Seejal Alias Nagma v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sheejal Alias Seejal Alias Nagma v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rashid Vs State of Haryana

Ajaydev Singh Vs Union of India through Junior Intelligence Officer

Aman Shangari Vs State of Punjab and Others

Neeraj Vs State of Haryana

Gaurav Dhiman & Another Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Dinesh Vs State of Haryana and Another