KIRAN DEVI @ KANCHAN BALA vs STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER — CRM-M/27794/2026

Disposed: --DISMISSED on 15th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: PHHC010832432026

Filing Number

CRM-M/39019/2026

Filing Date

14-May-2026

Registration No

CRM-M/27794/2026

Registration Date

14-May-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice Sumeet Goel

Coram

Mr. Justice Sumeet Goel

Bench Type

Single

Category

99 ( 945 )

Sub-Category

39 - ANTICIPATORY BAILS ( 144 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL BRANCH

Decision Date

15-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--DISMISSED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.KIRAN DEVI @ KANCHAN BALA

    Adv. NEERAJ JAIN

  2. 2.STATE OF PUNJAB

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER

  2. 2.STATE OF PUNJAB

  3. 3.GURCHARAN SINGH

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 15-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Sumeet GoelView PDF

    Case Summary: CRM-M/27794/2026 Court Decision: The High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed Kiran Devi's second anticipatory bail petition with exemplary costs of ₹20,000. The court found the petition lacked merit due to absence of substantial change in circumstances since withdrawal of her first petition on 23.04.2026, and criticized the petitioner's deliberate evasion of legal process for 21 days before refiling. Key Reasoning: The court noted serious allegations of organized immigration fraud—that the petitioner induced complainant Gurcharan Singh to pay ₹15,50,000 on false promises of sending his children to Canada. While the court acknowledged second anticipatory bail petitions are maintainable, it found no new facts or circumstances warranting relief. The court also condemned the "hit and try" methodology as forum shopping and abuse of judicial process. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 14-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRM-M/27794/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CRM-M/27794/2026 Court Decision: The High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed Kiran Devi's second anticipatory bail petition with exemplary costs of ₹20,000. The court found the petition lacked merit due to absence of substantial change in circumstances since withdrawal of her first petition on 23.04.2026, and criticized the petitioner's deliberate evasion of legal process for 21 days before refiling. Key Reasoning: The court noted serious allegations of organized immigration fraud—that the petitioner induced complainant Gurcharan Singh to pay ₹15,50,000 on false promises of sending his children to Canada. While the court acknowledged second anticipatory bail petitions are maintainable, it found no new facts or circumstances warranting relief. The court also condemned the "hit and try" methodology as forum shopping and abuse of judicial process. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case