NIRDOSH @ NIRDOSH KUMAR vs STATE OF HARYANA — CRM-M/16361/2026

Disposed: --ALLOWED on 11th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: PHHC010492742026

Filing Number

CRM-M/21387/2026

Filing Date

23-Mar-2026

Registration No

CRM-M/16361/2026

Registration Date

23-Mar-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice Surya Partap Singh

Coram

Mr. Justice Surya Partap Singh

Bench Type

Single

Category

99 ( 945 )

Sub-Category

40.2 - REGULAR BAIL (HARYANA) ( 219 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL BRANCH

Decision Date

11-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--ALLOWED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.NIRDOSH @ NIRDOSH KUMAR

    Adv. SAGAR AGGARWAL

  2. 2.STATE OF HARYANA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF HARYANA

  2. 2.STATE OF HARYANA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 11-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Surya Partap SinghView PDF

    The High Court of Punjab and Haryana granted bail to Nirdosh Kumar in a fraud case (FIR No.37) involving an alleged investment scam through GFX Academy Pvt. Ltd., where investors were promised 5% weekly returns. The court held that after over one year of incarceration, completed investigation, and given the low conviction rate in India, prolonged detention violates the constitutional right to speedy trial under Article 21, with bail being the general rule and detention the exception. Bail was granted subject to conditions including no witness tampering, address notification, and no departure from India without court permission. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 23-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRM-M/16361/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana granted bail to Nirdosh Kumar in a fraud case (FIR No.37) involving an alleged investment scam through GFX Academy Pvt. Ltd., where investors were promised 5% weekly returns. The court held that after over one year of incarceration, completed investigation, and given the low conviction rate in India, prolonged detention violates the constitutional right to speedy trial under Article 21, with bail being the general rule and detention the exception. Bail was granted subject to conditions including no witness tampering, address notification, and no departure from India without court permission. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case