GURWINDER SINGH vs STATE OF PUNJAB — CRM-M/29689/2025

Disposed: --ALLOWED on 13th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: PHHC010766632025

Filing Number

CRM-M/40159/2025

Filing Date

12-May-2025

Registration No

CRM-M/29689/2025

Registration Date

23-May-2025

Judge

Mr. Justice Sanjay Vashisth

Coram

Mr. Justice Sanjay Vashisth

Bench Type

Single

Category

40.1 - REGULAR BAIL (PUNJAB) ( 220 )

Sub-Category

( 944 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL BRANCH

Decision Date

13-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--ALLOWED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.GURWINDER SINGH

    Adv. YASHPAL THAKUR

  2. 2.GURWINDER SINGH

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF PUNJAB

  2. 2.GURWINDER SINGH

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 13-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Sanjay VashisthView PDF

    Case Summary: CRM-M/29689/2025 The High Court of Punjab and Haryana granted regular bail to petitioners Gurwinder Singh and Vikas Batta, charged under NDPS Act Section 22(b) for possessing 1200 Lomotil tablets (75.6 grams, marginally above commercial quantity threshold). The court considered that the petitioners had remained incarcerated for over 14 months with no prior criminal history, trial progress was slow (only 2 of 15 prosecution witnesses examined), and further detention served no useful purpose. The petitioners were ordered released on furnishing bail bonds, with conditions prohibiting witness intimidation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 12-May-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRM-M/29689/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CRM-M/29689/2025 The High Court of Punjab and Haryana granted regular bail to petitioners Gurwinder Singh and Vikas Batta, charged under NDPS Act Section 22(b) for possessing 1200 Lomotil tablets (75.6 grams, marginally above commercial quantity threshold). The court considered that the petitioners had remained incarcerated for over 14 months with no prior criminal history, trial progress was slow (only 2 of 15 prosecution witnesses examined), and further detention served no useful purpose. The petitioners were ordered released on furnishing bail bonds, with conditions prohibiting witness intimidation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case