LAKHWINDER MASIH ALIAS JOHNY vs STATE OF PUNJAB — CRM-M/19149/2026

Disposed: --ALLOWED on 15th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: PHHC010555292026

Filing Number

CRM-M/24660/2026

Filing Date

01-Apr-2026

Registration No

CRM-M/19149/2026

Registration Date

07-Apr-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice Rajesh Bhardwaj

Coram

Mr. Justice Rajesh Bhardwaj

Bench Type

Single

Category

40.1 - REGULAR BAIL (PUNJAB) ( 220 )

Sub-Category

( 944 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL BRANCH

Decision Date

15-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--ALLOWED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.LAKHWINDER MASIH ALIAS JOHNY

    Adv. KINSHUK NANDA

  2. 2.LAKHWINDER MASIH @ JOHNY

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF PUNJAB

  2. 2.LAKHWINDER MASIH @ JOHNY

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 15-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Rajesh BhardwajView PDF

    The High Court of Punjab and Haryana granted bail to Lakhwinder Masih @ Johny in an NDPS case involving recovery of 430 Etizolam tablets (49.02 grams, a commercial quantity) from his residence. The court found that while the trial court had denied bail, the petitioner had suffered incarceration for approximately 1 year 10 months with minimal trial progress, and his co-accused supplier had already been granted bail. Applying Supreme Court precedent from *Mohd Muslim v. State*, the court held that prolonged incarceration without expeditious trial violates constitutional protections, particularly given procedural irregularities including alleged Section 50 NDPS Act violations and lack of independent witnesses. The court ordered the petitioner's release on furnishing bail/surety bonds. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 01-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRM-M/19149/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana granted bail to Lakhwinder Masih @ Johny in an NDPS case involving recovery of 430 Etizolam tablets (49.02 grams, a commercial quantity) from his residence. The court found that while the trial court had denied bail, the petitioner had suffered incarceration for approximately 1 year 10 months with minimal trial progress, and his co-accused supplier had already been granted bail. Applying Supreme Court precedent from *Mohd Muslim v. State*, the court held that prolonged incarceration without expeditious trial violates constitutional protections, particularly given procedural irregularities including alleged Section 50 NDPS Act violations and lack of independent witnesses. The court ordered the petitioner's release on furnishing bail/surety bonds. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case