PRINCE KUMAR vs STATE OF PUNJAB — CRM-M/10249/2026

Disposed: --ALLOWED on 21st April 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 09-Apr-2026

CNR: PHHC010289792026

Filing Number

CRM-M/11171/2026

Filing Date

17-Feb-2026

Registration No

CRM-M/10249/2026

Registration Date

19-Feb-2026

Judge

Mrs. Justice Manisha Batra

Coram

Mrs. Justice Manisha Batra

Bench Type

Single

Category

99 ( 945 )

Sub-Category

40.1 - REGULAR BAIL (PUNJAB) ( 220 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL BRANCH

Decision Date

21-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

--ALLOWED

Last updated 28-May-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.PRINCE KUMAR

    Adv. KULWINDER SINGH

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF PUNJAB

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 21-Apr-2026

    Mrs. Justice Manisha BatraView PDF

    Case Summary: CRM-M-10249/2026 The Punjab and Haryana High Court granted regular bail to Prince Kumar, who was arrested for NDPS Act violations (Sections 21(a), 21(b), 27(A)) after 20.71 grams of heroin and Rs. 6,50,000 were allegedly recovered from him. Justice Manisha Batra allowed the petition, reasoning that the recovered quantity does not constitute commercial quantity, investigation was complete with no prosecution witnesses examined yet (trial would take considerable time), and the petitioner had clean antecedents—making continued custody unjustifiable. Bail was conditional on furnishing personal/surety bonds; prosecution retains the right to seek bail cancellation if petitioner is involved in subsequent cases. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 17-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRM-M/10249/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CRM-M-10249/2026 The Punjab and Haryana High Court granted regular bail to Prince Kumar, who was arrested for NDPS Act violations (Sections 21(a), 21(b), 27(A)) after 20.71 grams of heroin and Rs. 6,50,000 were allegedly recovered from him. Justice Manisha Batra allowed the petition, reasoning that the recovered quantity does not constitute commercial quantity, investigation was complete with no prosecution witnesses examined yet (trial would take considerable time), and the petitioner had clean antecedents—making continued custody unjustifiable. Bail was conditional on furnishing personal/surety bonds; prosecution retains the right to seek bail cancellation if petitioner is involved in subsequent cases. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case