DILPREET SINGH @ DEEPA vs STATE OF PUNJAB — CRM-M/19272/2025

Disposed: --ALLOWED on 24th March 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: PHHC010555642025

Filing Number

CRM-M/29123/2025

Filing Date

04-Apr-2025

Registration No

CRM-M/19272/2025

Registration Date

04-Apr-2025

Judge

Mr. Justice Sanjay Vashisth

Coram

Mr. Justice Sanjay Vashisth

Bench Type

Single

Category

99 ( 945 )

Sub-Category

40.1 - REGULAR BAIL (PUNJAB) ( 220 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL BRANCH

Decision Date

24-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

--ALLOWED

Last updated 11-Apr-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.DILPREET SINGH @ DEEPA

    Adv. SATNAM SINGH GILL

  2. 2.DILPREET SINGH @ DEEPA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF PUNJAB

  2. 2.DILPREET SINGH @ DEEPA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 24-Mar-2026

    Mr. Justice Sanjay VashisthView PDF

    Case Summary: CRM-M-19272/2025 The High Court of Punjab and Haryana granted regular bail to Dilpreet Singh @ Deepa, a 24-year-old accused of allegedly striking Iqbal Singh on the head with a wooden object during a dispute over lifting wooden logs on 29.12.2024 (FIR under BNS sections 110, 126(2), 115(2), 351(3), 3(5)). The court found no substantial reason to continue detention, noting that the majority of 20 prosecution witnesses remain unexamined and trial will take considerable time. Bail was granted subject to furnishing bail/surety bonds, with a warning that future involvement in similar activities may result in bail cancellation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 04-Apr-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRM-M/19272/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CRM-M-19272/2025 The High Court of Punjab and Haryana granted regular bail to Dilpreet Singh @ Deepa, a 24-year-old accused of allegedly striking Iqbal Singh on the head with a wooden object during a dispute over lifting wooden logs on 29.12.2024 (FIR under BNS sections 110, 126(2), 115(2), 351(3), 3(5)). The court found no substantial reason to continue detention, noting that the majority of 20 prosecution witnesses remain unexamined and trial will take considerable time. Bail was granted subject to furnishing bail/surety bonds, with a warning that future involvement in similar activities may result in bail cancellation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case