MANJEET SINGH AND ANOTHER vs STATE OF PUNJAB — CRM-M/57941/2025

Disposed: --DISMISSED on 10th April 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 19-Nov-2025

CNR: PHHC011661112025

Filing Number

CRM-M/86944/2025

Filing Date

13-Oct-2025

Registration No

CRM-M/57941/2025

Registration Date

13-Oct-2025

Judge

Mr. Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi

Coram

Mr. Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi

Bench Type

Single

Category

99 ( 945 )

Sub-Category

39 - ANTICIPATORY BAILS ( 144 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL BRANCH

Decision Date

10-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

--DISMISSED

Last updated 12-May-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.MANJEET SINGH AND ANOTHER

    Adv. EKTA THAKUR

  2. 2.MANJEET SINGH

  3. 3.HARVINDER SINGH

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF PUNJAB

  2. 2.STATE OF PUNJAB

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 10-Apr-2026

    Mr. Justice Jasjit Singh BediView PDF

    The High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed the anticipatory bail petition of Manjeet Singh and his son Harvinder Singh, who were accused of defrauding an NRI family by embezzling restaurant income through unauthorized employee bank accounts. The court found a prima facie case established against the accused, as investigation revealed over Rs. 57 lakh were siphoned from the restaurant into employee accounts (opened without authorization) and subsequently withdrawn by the accused, with employees' statements confirming the petitioners' involvement in the scheme. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 13-Oct-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRM-M/57941/2025

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed the anticipatory bail petition of Manjeet Singh and his son Harvinder Singh, who were accused of defrauding an NRI family by embezzling restaurant income through unauthorized employee bank accounts. The court found a prima facie case established against the accused, as investigation revealed over Rs. 57 lakh were siphoned from the restaurant into employee accounts (opened without authorization) and subsequently withdrawn by the accused, with employees' statements confirming the petitioners' involvement in the scheme. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case