Rajeev Kumar v. State of Punjab and Another

Punjab & Haryana HC9 Mar 2026CRM-M/8815/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CRM-M-8815-2026 (O&M); Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh; decision 09.03.2026; Subhas Mehla, J.; Rajeev Kumar v. State of Punjab and others; regular bail allowed; FIR No.127 dated 08.10.2021, Police Station Anandpur Sahib, District Rupnagar; Sections 323, 148, 149 IPC; Section 21(1) and 4(1) Mines and Minerals (Regulation of Development) Act, 1957; custody since 04.02.2026; compromise deed dated 07.01.2026; quashing petition based on compromise; bail cannot be denied as measure of punishment; bonds before trial Court/Duty Magistrate/CJM.

What did the court decide?

Release on regular bail upon furnishing requisite bonds before the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned, subject to conditions securing the petitioner's presence during trial; no opinion expressed on merits. ¶¶21

Rajeev Kumar Vs State of Punjab and… — Mining and Natural Resources | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

¶1

In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana At Chandigarh

¶2

132

¶3

CRM-M-8815-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision:- 09.03.2026

¶4

Rajeev Kumar … Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Punjab and others

¶7

... Respondents

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHAS MEHLA

¶9

Present:Mr. Suneet Pal Singh Aulakh, Advoacate for the petitioner.

¶10

Mr. Adesh Pal Singh, AAG, Punjab.

¶11

¶12

SUBHAS MEHLA, J . (Oral)

¶13

By way of the present petition, the petitioner is seeking regular bail in case bearing FIR No.127 dated 08.10.2021 under Sections 323, 148, 149 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 21(1) and 4(1) of Mines and Minerals (Regulation of Development) Act, 1957, registered at Police Station Anandpur Sahib, District Rupnagar.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that in compliance of order dated 22.01.2026 passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in CRM-M-3503-2026 (Annexure P-8), the petitioner surrendered and is in custody since 04.02.2026, i.e. for the last about one month; the matter has been compromised between the parties via compromise deed dated 07.01.2026 (AnnexureP-7). A petition for quashing of FIR on the basis of compromise has been filed and statement of parties have already been recorded. Thus, the petitioner deserves to be released on regular bail.

¶15

GEETA RANI 2026.03.11 18:20 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court at Chandigarh

¶16

CRM-M-8815-2026 (O&M) ( 2 )

¶17

Mr. Jasjeet Singh Dhaliwal, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of respondents No.2 to 4 today and has filed Vakalatnama , which is taken on record. He has admitted the factum of compromise.

¶18

Learned State counsel opposed the bail petition by submitting that there are serious allegation against the petitioner and he was actively involved in commission of offence.

¶19

Heard.

¶20

Keeping in view the contentions raised by learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for respondents No.2 to 4, the fact that the petitioner is in custody since 04.02.2026, and that the matter has been compromised between the parties, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping him in custody for any further period, as concession of bail cannot be denied just as a measure of punishment, this Court deems it a fit case to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner.

¶21

Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail by the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned on his furnishing requisite bonds and imposing such conditions so that the presence of the petitioner be secured during trial as and when required.

( SUBHAS MEHLA )

09.03.2026

JUDGE

Geeta

Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No

¶27

GEETA RANI 2026.03.11 18:20 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court at Chandigarh

Rajeev Kumar v. State of Punjab and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajeev Kumar v. State of Punjab and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohd Asraf Alias Ashu and Another Vs State of Punjab

Vishal Handa Vs State of Punjab and Others

Gurvinder Singh Alias Harman Alias Goldy Alias Harshdeep Vs State of Ut Chandigarh and Another

Ishwar Singh Sangwan Vs State of Haryana and Others

Mehak Vs Union Terrotory Chandigarh and Others

Ranjit Singh Vs State of Punjab