LADDI SINGH @ MASTAN SINGH vs STATE OF PUNJAB — CRM-M/6147/2026

Disposed: --ALLOWED on 13th May 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 13-May-2026

CNR: PHHC010183462026

Filing Number

CRM-M/5818/2026

Filing Date

02-Feb-2026

Registration No

CRM-M/6147/2026

Registration Date

02-Feb-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice Rajesh Bhardwaj

Coram

Mr. Justice Rajesh Bhardwaj

Bench Type

Single

Category

99 ( 945 )

Sub-Category

40.1 - REGULAR BAIL (PUNJAB) ( 220 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL BRANCH

Decision Date

13-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--ALLOWED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.LADDI SINGH @ MASTAN SINGH

    Adv. NITISH GARG

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF PUNJAB

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 13-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Rajesh BhardwajView PDF

    CASE SUMMARY: CRM-M/6147/2026 The Punjab and Haryana High Court granted regular bail to Laddi Singh on May 13, 2026, in a case involving charges under BNS Sections 109, 115(2), 126, 3(5), 351(3) and Arms Act Section 25. Although named in the FIR relating to a shooting incident, the court found that direct firing allegations were against co-accused Aakash Sohi and Gurloveleen Singh, with the petitioner only allegedly raising "lalkara" (incitement). The court noted the petitioner had completed 7 months 23 days of custody, had no criminal antecedents, had compromised with the complainant, and no prosecution witnesses had been examined, warranting bail pending trial. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 02-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRM-M/6147/2026

casestatus.in Summary

CASE SUMMARY: CRM-M/6147/2026 The Punjab and Haryana High Court granted regular bail to Laddi Singh on May 13, 2026, in a case involving charges under BNS Sections 109, 115(2), 126, 3(5), 351(3) and Arms Act Section 25. Although named in the FIR relating to a shooting incident, the court found that direct firing allegations were against co-accused Aakash Sohi and Gurloveleen Singh, with the petitioner only allegedly raising "lalkara" (incitement). The court noted the petitioner had completed 7 months 23 days of custody, had no criminal antecedents, had compromised with the complainant, and no prosecution witnesses had been examined, warranting bail pending trial. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case