ARSHDEEP SINGH @ ARSH vs STATE OF PUNJAB — CRM-M/25838/2026

Disposed: --ALLOWED on 13th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: PHHC010762502026

Filing Number

CRM-M/35478/2026

Filing Date

04-May-2026

Registration No

CRM-M/25838/2026

Registration Date

06-May-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice Surya Partap Singh

Coram

Mr. Justice Surya Partap Singh

Category

99 ( 945 )

Sub-Category

40.1 - REGULAR BAIL (PUNJAB) ( 220 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL BRANCH

Decision Date

13-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--ALLOWED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.ARSHDEEP SINGH @ ARSH

    Adv. LAKHWINDER SINGH MANN

  2. 2.ARSHDEEP SINGH ALIAS ARSH

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF PUNJAB

  2. 2.ARSHDEEP SINGH ALIAS ARSH

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 13-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Surya Partap SinghView PDF

    Case Summary: CRM-M No. 25838/2026 Decision: The High Court of Punjab and Haryana granted bail to petitioner Arshdeep Singh @ Arsh, holding he is entitled to release on personal and surety bonds subject to conditions. Key Reasoning: The court found that after 10 months 22 days in custody, with clean antecedents, the petitioner's alleged role was limited to pushing and punching the complainant (causing non-grievous injuries), with no evidence he inflicted fatal injuries on the deceased or carried any weapon. Since investigation is complete, no witnesses have been examined yet, and trial faces lengthy delays, continued detention serves no purpose and violates the constitutional right to speedy trial. The court emphasized that bail is the general rule, not the exception. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 04-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRM-M/25838/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CRM-M No. 25838/2026 Decision: The High Court of Punjab and Haryana granted bail to petitioner Arshdeep Singh @ Arsh, holding he is entitled to release on personal and surety bonds subject to conditions. Key Reasoning: The court found that after 10 months 22 days in custody, with clean antecedents, the petitioner's alleged role was limited to pushing and punching the complainant (causing non-grievous injuries), with no evidence he inflicted fatal injuries on the deceased or carried any weapon. Since investigation is complete, no witnesses have been examined yet, and trial faces lengthy delays, continued detention serves no purpose and violates the constitutional right to speedy trial. The court emphasized that bail is the general rule, not the exception. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case