VISHALDEEP SINGH @ VISHAL vs STATE OF PUNJAB — CRM-M/22195/2026

Disposed: --ALLOWED on 13th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: PHHC010672522026

Filing Number

CRM-M/30800/2026

Filing Date

21-Apr-2026

Registration No

CRM-M/22195/2026

Registration Date

21-Apr-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice Aman Chaudhary

Coram

Mr. Justice Aman Chaudhary

Bench Type

Single

Category

99 ( 945 )

Sub-Category

39 - ANTICIPATORY BAILS ( 144 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL BRANCH

Decision Date

13-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--ALLOWED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.VISHALDEEP SINGH @ VISHAL

    Adv. RISHU MAHAJAN

  2. 2.STATE OF PUNJAB

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF PUNJAB

  2. 2.STATE OF PUNJAB

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 13-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Aman ChaudharyView PDF

    Case Summary: CRM-M/22195/2026 The Punjab and Haryana High Court granted anticipatory bail to Vishaldeep Singh in an Arms Act case (FIR No. 90, Jandiala PS, Amritsar) involving illegal firearms. The petitioner's name had surfaced based on co-accused disclosure statements and vehicle ownership, but with no direct evidence linking him to the weapons. The court made the interim bail order absolute after confirming the petitioner had joined and fully cooperated with the investigating agency, which stated further custodial interrogation was unnecessary. The bail remains conditional on continued cooperation with police investigations, with liberty for the State to seek cancellation if the petitioner fails to cooperate. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 21-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRM-M/22195/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CRM-M/22195/2026 The Punjab and Haryana High Court granted anticipatory bail to Vishaldeep Singh in an Arms Act case (FIR No. 90, Jandiala PS, Amritsar) involving illegal firearms. The petitioner's name had surfaced based on co-accused disclosure statements and vehicle ownership, but with no direct evidence linking him to the weapons. The court made the interim bail order absolute after confirming the petitioner had joined and fully cooperated with the investigating agency, which stated further custodial interrogation was unnecessary. The bail remains conditional on continued cooperation with police investigations, with liberty for the State to seek cancellation if the petitioner fails to cooperate. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case