ISHFAQ MUGAL @ ASHFAQ AHMED vs STATE OF PUNJAB — CRM-M/11418/2026

Disposed: --ALLOWED on 21st April 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 09-Mar-2026

CNR: PHHC010325602026

Filing Number

CRM-M/12895/2026

Filing Date

23-Feb-2026

Registration No

CRM-M/11418/2026

Registration Date

25-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.ISHFAQ MUGAL @ ASHFAQ AHMED

    Adv. Randeep 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 No. 11418/2026 The High Court of Punjab and Haryana granted bail to Ishfaq Mugal (alias Ashfaq Ahmed) in a drug trafficking case under NDPS Act sections 21, 27-A, 29, and IPC section 201. Although the petitioner's earlier bail plea was dismissed in July 2025, Justice Manisha Batra allowed the second petition, emphasizing that prolonged incarceration (approximately 1 year 11 months 12 days) coupled with slow trial progress (only 3 of 30 prosecution witnesses examined) warranted bail consideration despite serious charges involving heroin recovery and Rs. 3 lakhs drug money. The court held that constitutional protections under Article 21 override Section 37 NDPS restrictions when detention becomes unduly prolonged, citing Supreme Court precedents favoring bail over jail. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 23-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRM-M/11418/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CRM-M No. 11418/2026 The High Court of Punjab and Haryana granted bail to Ishfaq Mugal (alias Ashfaq Ahmed) in a drug trafficking case under NDPS Act sections 21, 27-A, 29, and IPC section 201. Although the petitioner's earlier bail plea was dismissed in July 2025, Justice Manisha Batra allowed the second petition, emphasizing that prolonged incarceration (approximately 1 year 11 months 12 days) coupled with slow trial progress (only 3 of 30 prosecution witnesses examined) warranted bail consideration despite serious charges involving heroin recovery and Rs. 3 lakhs drug money. The court held that constitutional protections under Article 21 override Section 37 NDPS restrictions when detention becomes unduly prolonged, citing Supreme Court precedents favoring bail over jail. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case