Disposed¶12

Sahab Singh v. State of Haryana & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC19 Mar 2026CRM-A/96/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single-judge order (Anoop Chitkara, J.) dated 19.03.2026 in CRM-A-96-MA-2018 (leave application CRM-A-890-2023), Sahab Singh v. State of Haryana & Ors.: leave to appeal granted against acquittal judgment dated 09.10.2017 despite opposition by private respondents Nos. 2 and 3; main appeal admitted; accused respondents directed to furnish personal bond and one surety of Rs. 25,000 each within two months, undertaking to appear if appeal is allowed; no statutes or precedents cited.

What did the court decide?

Leave to appeal granted against the acquittal judgment dated 09.10.2017; main appeal admitted; accused respondents No. 2 and 3 ordered to furnish, within two months, a personal bond of Rs. 25,000 and one surety of Rs. 25,000 each, with undertaking to appear before the Court if the appeal is allowed. ¶12

Sahab Singh Vs State of Haryana & Ors. — Punjab & Haryana HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶12

Issue for consideration

Whether leave to appeal should be granted against the judgment of acquittal dated 09.10.2017, on the contention that there is sufficient evidence on record for conviction of the private respondents and no appreciation of evidence in the acquittal judgment. +1 more

¶11

Court's answer

Leave to appeal granted against the judgment of acquittal dated 09.10.2017 notwithstanding opposition by the private respondents; Registry directed to assign a number to the appeal.

¶12

Ratio / Principle

The main appeal is admitted.

¶16

Key takeaways

The accused respondents No. 2 and 3 shall, within two months, furnish a personal bond of Rs. 25,000 and one surety of Rs. 25,000 to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court/Duty Magistrate, undertaking to appear before this Court if the appeal is allowed; the surety must be capable of producing the accused if they fail to appear; furnishing of the bonds is deemed acceptance of all stipulations of the order; the Registry is to communicate the order to the trial Court, and in case of failure to furnish the bond the concerned Court shall proceed further in accordance with law.ratio¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Order dated 19.03.2026 by Anoop Chitkara, J., in CRM-A-96-MA-2018 (leave application CRM-A-890-2023), Sahab Singh v. State of Haryana & Ors. Counsel for the complainant sought leave to appeal against the judgment of acquittal dated 09.10.2017, submitting that there was sufficient evidence on record for conviction of the private respondents and no appreciation of evidence in the acquittal judgment; counsel for the private respondents opposed the prayer. Leave to appeal was granted and the Registry was directed to assign a number to the appeal. In the main appeal, the appeal was admitted, and the accused respondents No. 2 and 3 were directed to execute attendance bonds within two months - a personal bond of Rs. 25,000 and one surety of Rs. 25,000 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 of the order, and failure to furnish the bond was to be dealt with in accordance with law. No statute or precedent was cited in the order.

¶1

¶2

CRM-A-96-MA-2018

¶3

204 CRM-A-96-MA-2018

¶4

SAHAB SINGH V/S STATE OF HARYANA & ORS

¶5

Present: Mr. G.C. Shahpuri, Advocate for the appellant.

¶6

Mr. Shiva Khurmi, D.A.G., Haryana

¶7

Mr. Ashish Sanghi, Advocate for respondent No. 2.

¶8

Mr. Ritesh Kumar Sharma, Advocate for Mr. Manish Soni, Advocate for respondent No. 3.

¶9

¶10

CRM-A-890-2023

¶11

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 the private respondents. There is no apprecia)on of evidence in judgment of acqui-al dated 09.10.2017.

¶12

Counsel for the private respondents opposes the prayer. Leave to appeal granted.

¶13

Registry to assign number to appeal.

Main appeal

Heard.

Admi-ed.

The accused i.e. respondents No. 2 and 3 to execute a bond for a-endance within two months, undertaking to appear in this Court, in case appeal is allowed.

¶18

Given above, the accused- respondents No. 2 and 3 shall furnish a personal bond of Rs. Twenty Five Thousand only (INR 25,000/-), and furnishing one surety for Rs. Twenty Five thousand only (INR 25,000/-), 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.

¶19

The furnishing of the personal bonds shall be deemed acceptance of the all

¶20

s)pula)ons, terms, and condi)ons of this order.

¶21

JYOTI 2026.03.20 13:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

¶22

¶23

CRM-A-96-MA-2018

¶24

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

¶25

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.

¶26

(ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE

¶27

19.03.2026 Jyo�-II

¶28

JYOTI 2026.03.20 13:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

Sahab Singh v. State of Haryana & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sahab Singh v. State of Haryana & 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

Bhagwant Singh and Others Vs State of Punjab and Others

Surender Vs State of Haryana

Kikkar Singh Vs Sham Sunder Monga

Raj Kumar Vs Vijay Singh and Another

Sahil Vs Inderpal Singh

Debo Kaur Vs State of Punjab