GAGANDEEP SINGH ALIAS GAGAN vs STATE OF PUNJAB — CRM-M/12253/2026

Disposed: --ALLOWED on 21st April 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 12-Mar-2026

CNR: PHHC010373292026

Filing Number

CRM-M/15254/2026

Filing Date

05-Mar-2026

Registration No

CRM-M/12253/2026

Registration Date

05-Mar-2026

Judge

Ms. Justice Mandeep Pannu

Coram

Ms. Justice Mandeep Pannu

Bench Type

Single

Category

40.1 - REGULAR BAIL (PUNJAB) ( 220 )

Sub-Category

( 944 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL BRANCH

Decision Date

21-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

--ALLOWED

Last updated 28-May-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.GAGANDEEP SINGH ALIAS GAGAN

    Adv. RISHU MAHAJAN

  2. 2.GAGANDEEP SINGH@GAGAN

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF PUNJAB

  2. 2.STATE OF PUNJAB

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 21-Apr-2026

    Ms. Justice Mandeep PannuView PDF

    Summary of CRM-M/12253/2026 The High Court of Punjab and Haryana granted regular bail to petitioner Gagandeep Singh, who has been in custody for over two years in an NDPS and Arms Act case involving recovery of heroin and a country-made pistol. The court found that only one of 18 prosecution witnesses has been examined, making trial conclusion indefinite, and noted that similar co-accused were already granted bail. The court held that indefinite incarceration without guilt being proven violates Article 21 of the Constitution, adopting the principle that "bail is a rule and jail is an exception." This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 05-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRM-M/12253/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of CRM-M/12253/2026 The High Court of Punjab and Haryana granted regular bail to petitioner Gagandeep Singh, who has been in custody for over two years in an NDPS and Arms Act case involving recovery of heroin and a country-made pistol. The court found that only one of 18 prosecution witnesses has been examined, making trial conclusion indefinite, and noted that similar co-accused were already granted bail. The court held that indefinite incarceration without guilt being proven violates Article 21 of the Constitution, adopting the principle that "bail is a rule and jail is an exception." This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case