AMIT SURI vs STATE OF PUNJAB — CRM-M/33725/2026

Disposed: --ALLOWED on 17th June 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: PHHC011005172026

Filing Number

CRM-M/47472/2026

Filing Date

09-Jun-2026

Registration No

CRM-M/33725/2026

Registration Date

10-Jun-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice Vinod S. Bhardwaj

Coram

Mr. Justice Vinod S. Bhardwaj

Bench Type

Single

Category

99 ( 945 )

Sub-Category

40.1 - REGULAR BAIL (PUNJAB) ( 220 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL BRANCH

Decision Date

17-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

--ALLOWED

Last updated 19-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.AMIT SURI

    Adv. SANDEEP WADHAWAN

  2. 2.AMIT SURI

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF PUNJAB

  2. 2.AMIT SURI

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 17-Jun-2026

    Mr. Justice Vinod S. BhardwajView PDF

    Case Summary: CRM-M-33725-2026 Decision: The High Court of Punjab & Haryana granted regular bail to Amit Suri, who was accused of defrauding complainant Vipan Kumar of insurance investment proceeds (Rs. 11 lakh) under IPC sections 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, and 120-B. Key Reasoning: The court found that although an FDR (Fixed Deposit Receipt) of Rs. 7 lakh—required as a bail condition—was automatically discounted upon maturity due to the bank's internal sweep facility (not at the petitioner's behest), the petitioner subsequently furnished a fresh FDR covering both principal and accrued interest with an appropriate lien. The court noted the petitioner's prior compliance with bail conditions and absence of willful breach, thus ordering his release on bail subject to standard conditions including non-interference with witnesses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 09-Jun-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRM-M/33725/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CRM-M-33725-2026 Decision: The High Court of Punjab & Haryana granted regular bail to Amit Suri, who was accused of defrauding complainant Vipan Kumar of insurance investment proceeds (Rs. 11 lakh) under IPC sections 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, and 120-B. Key Reasoning: The court found that although an FDR (Fixed Deposit Receipt) of Rs. 7 lakh—required as a bail condition—was automatically discounted upon maturity due to the bank's internal sweep facility (not at the petitioner's behest), the petitioner subsequently furnished a fresh FDR covering both principal and accrued interest with an appropriate lien. The court noted the petitioner's prior compliance with bail conditions and absence of willful breach, thus ordering his release on bail subject to standard conditions including non-interference with witnesses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case