JAGDEEP SINGH @ DEEP vs STATE OF PUNJAB — CRM-M/17140/2026

Disposed: --ALLOWED on 12th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: PHHC010497762026

Filing Number

CRM-M/21636/2026

Filing Date

23-Mar-2026

Registration No

CRM-M/17140/2026

Registration Date

27-Mar-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice Subhas Mehla

Coram

Mr. Justice Subhas Mehla

Bench Type

Single

Category

99 ( 945 )

Sub-Category

40.1 - REGULAR BAIL (PUNJAB) ( 220 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL BRANCH

Decision Date

12-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--ALLOWED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.JAGDEEP SINGH @ DEEP

    Adv. SAKSHI MITTAL

  2. 2.JAGDEEP SINGH

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF PUNJAB

  2. 2.JAGDEEP SINGH

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 12-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Subhas MehlaView PDF

    Case Summary: CRM-M/17140/2026 The Punjab and Haryana High Court granted regular bail to petitioner Jagdeep Singh, who was arrested for allegedly participating in a fraud scheme providing false surety bonds to civil courts using forged documents. The court found merit in the petition based on: (1) his case being on similar footing as co-accused already granted bail; (2) clean criminal record; (3) over 10 months in custody; and (4) lengthy trial timeline making continued detention purposeless. Applying the principle that "bail is rule, jail is exception," the court directed his release on furnishing requisite bonds, without commenting on case merits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 23-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRM-M/17140/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CRM-M/17140/2026 The Punjab and Haryana High Court granted regular bail to petitioner Jagdeep Singh, who was arrested for allegedly participating in a fraud scheme providing false surety bonds to civil courts using forged documents. The court found merit in the petition based on: (1) his case being on similar footing as co-accused already granted bail; (2) clean criminal record; (3) over 10 months in custody; and (4) lengthy trial timeline making continued detention purposeless. Applying the principle that "bail is rule, jail is exception," the court directed his release on furnishing requisite bonds, without commenting on case merits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case