MANJIT SINGH vs STATE OF PUNJAB — CRM-M/26587/2026

Disposed: --DISPOSED OF on 12th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: PHHC010677242026

Filing Number

CRM-M/31087/2026

Filing Date

21-Apr-2026

Registration No

CRM-M/26587/2026

Registration Date

08-May-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice Sanjay Vashisth

Coram

Mr. Justice Sanjay Vashisth

Category

38.1 - QUASHING PETITIONS I/O ( 152 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL BRANCH

Decision Date

12-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--DISPOSED OF

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.MANJIT SINGH

    Adv. PARDEEP KUMAR

  2. 2.STATE OF PUNJAB

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF PUNJAB

  2. 2.STATE OF PUNJAB

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 12-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Sanjay VashisthView PDF

    Case Summary: CRM-M/26587/2026 The Punjab and Haryana High Court set aside non-bailable arrest warrants against Manjit Singh, who had been declared a proclaimed offender in 2011 after absconding from a 2003 traffic-related criminal case. The Court granted Singh one opportunity to appear before the trial court, finding he deserved a chance despite his 15-year absence, particularly given he had worked abroad in Dubai as a laborer and claimed ignorance of pending proceedings. The Court conditioned reinstatement on: appearance before trial court by May 27, 2026, furnishing fresh bail/surety bonds, submitting an affidavit guaranteeing future attendance, and paying ₹20,000 as costs to a local Old Age Home within two weeks. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 21-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRM-M/26587/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CRM-M/26587/2026 The Punjab and Haryana High Court set aside non-bailable arrest warrants against Manjit Singh, who had been declared a proclaimed offender in 2011 after absconding from a 2003 traffic-related criminal case. The Court granted Singh one opportunity to appear before the trial court, finding he deserved a chance despite his 15-year absence, particularly given he had worked abroad in Dubai as a laborer and claimed ignorance of pending proceedings. The Court conditioned reinstatement on: appearance before trial court by May 27, 2026, furnishing fresh bail/surety bonds, submitting an affidavit guaranteeing future attendance, and paying ₹20,000 as costs to a local Old Age Home within two weeks. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case