KULWINDER SINGH @ GOKU vs STATE OF PUNJAB — CRM-M/67036/2025

Disposed: --ALLOWED on 24th March 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 04-Dec-2025

CNR: PHHC011915542025

Filing Number

CRM-M/100089/2025

Filing Date

26-Nov-2025

Registration No

CRM-M/67036/2025

Registration Date

27-Nov-2025

Judge

Mr. Justice Rajesh Bhardwaj

Coram

Mr. Justice Rajesh Bhardwaj

Bench Type

Single

Category

99 ( 945 )

Sub-Category

40.1 - REGULAR BAIL (PUNJAB) ( 220 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL BRANCH

Decision Date

24-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

--ALLOWED

Last updated 11-Apr-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.KULWINDER SINGH @ GOKU

    Adv. JASHANDEEP SINGH SANDHU

  2. 2.KULWINDER SINGH @ GOKU

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF PUNJAB

  2. 2.STATE OF PUNJAB

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 24-Mar-2026

    Mr. Justice Rajesh BhardwajView PDF

    Case Summary: CRM-M-67036/2025 The Punjab and Haryana High Court granted regular bail to Kulwinder Singh, arrested in July 2023 for possessing 20,000 Tramadol tablets (6.980 kg—a commercial quantity) under NDPS Act Section 22(C). Despite the serious charge, Justice Rajesh Bhardwaj held that after 2 years, 1 month of incarceration with 6 of 15 prosecution witnesses still unexamined, denial of bail violated the accused's constitutional right to speedy trial under Article 21, citing Supreme Court precedent that unduly prolonged pre-trial detention is unconstitutional regardless of offense severity. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 26-Nov-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRM-M/67036/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CRM-M-67036/2025 The Punjab and Haryana High Court granted regular bail to Kulwinder Singh, arrested in July 2023 for possessing 20,000 Tramadol tablets (6.980 kg—a commercial quantity) under NDPS Act Section 22(C). Despite the serious charge, Justice Rajesh Bhardwaj held that after 2 years, 1 month of incarceration with 6 of 15 prosecution witnesses still unexamined, denial of bail violated the accused's constitutional right to speedy trial under Article 21, citing Supreme Court precedent that unduly prolonged pre-trial detention is unconstitutional regardless of offense severity. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case