ROHIT vs STATE OF PUNJAB — CRM-M/12365/2026

Disposed: --ALLOWED on 11th May 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 07-Mar-2026

CNR: PHHC010362402026

Filing Number

CRM-M/14603/2026

Filing Date

27-Feb-2026

Registration No

CRM-M/12365/2026

Registration Date

06-Mar-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice Surya Partap Singh

Coram

Mr. Justice Surya Partap Singh

Bench Type

Single

Category

99 ( 945 )

Sub-Category

39 - ANTICIPATORY BAILS ( 144 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL BRANCH

Decision Date

11-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--ALLOWED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.ROHIT

    Adv. KARAN CHOUDHARY

  2. 2.STATE OF PUNJAB

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF PUNJAB

  2. 2.STATE OF PUNJAB

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 11-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Surya Partap SinghView PDF

    Case Summary: CRM-M/12365/2026 The Punjab & Haryana High Court at Chandigarh granted anticipatory bail to petitioner Rohit in a case involving offences under multiple sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (FIR No.12 dated 18.01.2026, Police Station Rangar Nangal, Batala). The court found that since the petitioner had complied with the interim anticipatory bail conditions by joining the investigation and the investigating officer confirmed that custodial interrogation was not required, he was entitled to bail. The petition was allowed and the interim anticipatory bail order dated 11.03.2026 was made absolute. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 27-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRM-M/12365/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CRM-M/12365/2026 The Punjab & Haryana High Court at Chandigarh granted anticipatory bail to petitioner Rohit in a case involving offences under multiple sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (FIR No.12 dated 18.01.2026, Police Station Rangar Nangal, Batala). The court found that since the petitioner had complied with the interim anticipatory bail conditions by joining the investigation and the investigating officer confirmed that custodial interrogation was not required, he was entitled to bail. The petition was allowed and the interim anticipatory bail order dated 11.03.2026 was made absolute. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case