POOJA ALIAS PARI MAHANT vs STATE OF PUNJAB — CRM-M/24108/2026

Disposed: --ALLOWED on 15th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: PHHC010702712026

Filing Number

CRM-M/32452/2026

Filing Date

24-Apr-2026

Registration No

CRM-M/24108/2026

Registration Date

28-Apr-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice Surya Partap Singh

Coram

Mr. Justice Surya Partap Singh

Bench Type

Single

Category

99 ( 945 )

Sub-Category

40.1 - REGULAR BAIL (PUNJAB) ( 220 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL BRANCH

Decision Date

15-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--ALLOWED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.POOJA ALIAS PARI MAHANT

    Adv. JASPREET SINGH BENIPAL

  2. 2.POOJA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF PUNJAB

  2. 2.POOJA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 15-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Surya Partap SinghView PDF

    Summary of CRM-M/24108/2026 The Punjab and Haryana High Court granted bail to petitioner Pooja @ Pari Mahant, who was arrested in connection with a serious group assault case involving multiple accused. The court found that despite over six months of incarceration, the petitioner's limited role (inflicting injuries only with kicks, no weapon used), clean criminal record, completed investigation, victim's hospital discharge, and low likelihood of trial conclusion in the near future warranted bail. The court emphasized fundamental principles that bail is the general rule, not the exception, and that prolonged pre-trial detention violates constitutional rights to speedy trial under Article 21. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 24-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRM-M/24108/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of CRM-M/24108/2026 The Punjab and Haryana High Court granted bail to petitioner Pooja @ Pari Mahant, who was arrested in connection with a serious group assault case involving multiple accused. The court found that despite over six months of incarceration, the petitioner's limited role (inflicting injuries only with kicks, no weapon used), clean criminal record, completed investigation, victim's hospital discharge, and low likelihood of trial conclusion in the near future warranted bail. The court emphasized fundamental principles that bail is the general rule, not the exception, and that prolonged pre-trial detention violates constitutional rights to speedy trial under Article 21. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case