KULDEEP SINGH vs STATE OF PUNJAB — CRM-M/22244/2026

Disposed: --ALLOWED on 14th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: PHHC010659812026

Filing Number

CRM-M/30165/2026

Filing Date

20-Apr-2026

Registration No

CRM-M/22244/2026

Registration Date

21-Apr-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice Surya Partap Singh

Coram

Mr. Justice Surya Partap Singh

Bench Type

Single

Category

99 ( 945 )

Sub-Category

39 - ANTICIPATORY BAILS ( 144 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL BRANCH

Decision Date

14-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--ALLOWED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.KULDEEP SINGH

    Adv. VIPUL JINDAL

  2. 2.KULDEP SINGH

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF PUNJAB

  2. 2.KULDEP SINGH

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Surya Partap SinghView PDF

    Summary of CRM-M/22244/2026 The High Court of Punjab and Haryana granted absolute anticipatory bail to Kuldeep Singh in a narcotic drugs and arms case (FIR No. 325). The court found that the petitioner had already joined the investigation, no incriminating material was recovered from his possession, and the only evidence against him was a co-accused's custodial disclosure statement of questionable admissibility. Applying Supreme Court precedent protecting against forced self-incrimination, the court held that custodial interrogation would be unproductive and unnecessary, and made the interim bail order absolute. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 20-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRM-M/22244/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of CRM-M/22244/2026 The High Court of Punjab and Haryana granted absolute anticipatory bail to Kuldeep Singh in a narcotic drugs and arms case (FIR No. 325). The court found that the petitioner had already joined the investigation, no incriminating material was recovered from his possession, and the only evidence against him was a co-accused's custodial disclosure statement of questionable admissibility. Applying Supreme Court precedent protecting against forced self-incrimination, the court held that custodial interrogation would be unproductive and unnecessary, and made the interim bail order absolute. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case