SUKHJIT SINGH JOHAL ALIAS SUKH JOHAL vs STATE OF PUNJAB — CRM-M/29000/2026

Disposed: --ALLOWED on 03rd June 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: PHHC010864582026

Filing Number

CRM-M/40720/2026

Filing Date

19-May-2026

Registration No

CRM-M/29000/2026

Registration Date

19-May-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

03-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

--ALLOWED

Last updated 05-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SUKHJIT SINGH JOHAL ALIAS SUKH JOHAL

    Adv. TANVIR JOSHI

  2. 2.SUKHJIT SINGH JOHAL@ SUKH JOHAL

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF PUNJAB

  2. 2.SUKHJIT SINGH JOHAL@ SUKH JOHAL

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 03-Jun-2026

    Mr. Justice Surya Partap SinghView PDF

    Case Summary: CRM-M No. 29000/2026 The High Court of Punjab and Haryana granted bail to Sukhjit Singh Johal, accused of operating an illegal drug de-addiction centre where 1,005 Alprazolam tablets and 1,000 Tramadol tablets were recovered. The court held that the petitioner's incarceration exceeding 13 months, coupled with trial delays and similar co-accused already granted bail, warranted bail despite NDPS Act Section 37 restrictions, emphasizing that prolonged pre-trial detention violates the fundamental right to speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution. Bail was granted subject to standard conditions including furnishing bonds and restrictions on leaving India without court permission. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 19-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRM-M/29000/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CRM-M No. 29000/2026 The High Court of Punjab and Haryana granted bail to Sukhjit Singh Johal, accused of operating an illegal drug de-addiction centre where 1,005 Alprazolam tablets and 1,000 Tramadol tablets were recovered. The court held that the petitioner's incarceration exceeding 13 months, coupled with trial delays and similar co-accused already granted bail, warranted bail despite NDPS Act Section 37 restrictions, emphasizing that prolonged pre-trial detention violates the fundamental right to speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution. Bail was granted subject to standard conditions including furnishing bonds and restrictions on leaving India without court permission. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case