AMIT BANSAL vs STATE OF PUNJAB — CRM-M/33480/2026

Disposed: --ALLOWED on 11th June 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: PHHC011001152026

Filing Number

CRM-M/47211/2026

Filing Date

08-Jun-2026

Registration No

CRM-M/33480/2026

Registration Date

09-Jun-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice Sandeep Moudgil

Coram

Mr. Justice Sandeep Moudgil

Bench Type

Single

Category

99 ( 945 )

Sub-Category

39 - ANTICIPATORY BAILS ( 144 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL BRANCH

Decision Date

11-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

--ALLOWED

Last updated 13-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.AMIT BANSAL

    Adv. AASHUTOSH JERATH

  2. 2.STATE OF PUNJAB

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF PUNJAB

  2. 2.STATE OF PUNJAB

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 11-Jun-2026

    Mr. Justice Sandeep MoudgilView PDF

    Case Summary: CRM-M/33480/2026 Decision: The High Court of Punjab and Haryana granted anticipatory bail to Amit Bansal in an NDPS case, finding insufficient evidence of his involvement despite the trial court's summoning order. The court noted that Bansal was neither named in the FIR, had no recovery made from him, and was twice found innocent during investigation with consistent recommendations for discharge by the Investigating Officer. Key Reasoning: The court emphasized that the prosecution's case rested solely on presumptive inferences and a single 19-second phone call with a co-accused, with no independent evidence linking him to the recovered contraband, its supply, sale, or any conspiracy. Since custodial interrogation was unnecessary (all evidence being documentary and already part of trial records) and Bansal had cooperated throughout, bail was granted subject to his joining investigation within one week and standard conditions under Section 482 BNSS, 2023. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 08-Jun-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRM-M/33480/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CRM-M/33480/2026 Decision: The High Court of Punjab and Haryana granted anticipatory bail to Amit Bansal in an NDPS case, finding insufficient evidence of his involvement despite the trial court's summoning order. The court noted that Bansal was neither named in the FIR, had no recovery made from him, and was twice found innocent during investigation with consistent recommendations for discharge by the Investigating Officer. Key Reasoning: The court emphasized that the prosecution's case rested solely on presumptive inferences and a single 19-second phone call with a co-accused, with no independent evidence linking him to the recovered contraband, its supply, sale, or any conspiracy. Since custodial interrogation was unnecessary (all evidence being documentary and already part of trial records) and Bansal had cooperated throughout, bail was granted subject to his joining investigation within one week and standard conditions under Section 482 BNSS, 2023. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case