District of New Jersey • 2:26-cv-04182

#1

Apr 20, 2026

Emergency PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus ( Filing fee $ 5 receipt number ANJDC-17328745.), filed by GURPINDERJIT SINGH. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet, # 2 Exhibit Notice to Appear and Order of Release on Recognizance)(MAZRUI, HARITH) (Entered: 04/20/2026)

#2

Apr 20, 2026

TEXT ORDER. Respondents are hereby enjoined from transferring Petitioner from New Jersey pending further Order of the Court. So Ordered by Chief Judge Renee Marie Bumb on 4/20/2026. (jr) (Entered: 04/20/2026)

Apr 20, 2026

Emergent Immigration Habeas Non-transfer Order

Apr 20, 2026

Case assigned to Judge Brian R. Martinotti. (jr)

Apr 20, 2026

Case Assigned/Reassigned

#3

Apr 21, 2026

TEXT ORDER: Before the Court is Petitioner Gurpinderjit Singh's ("Petitioner") Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus ("Petition") pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241, challenging his continued detention by immigration authorities without an individualized bond hearing. (ECF No. 1.) Petitioner, a native of India, entered the United States in January 2024. (See generally id.) After being apprehended by the Department of Homeland Security, he was released on his own recognizance. (See generally id.) Petitioner contends that he is unlawfully detained under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b) and is entitled to release or a bond hearing under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a). (See id.) Based on this Court's statutory interpretation in Sandhu v. Tsoukaris, No. 25-14607 (BRM) (D.N.J. November 20, 2025), the Court finds the facts asserted in the Petition establish that Petitioner cannot be mandatorily detained under § 1225(b) as he has resided in the United States for several years after entry without admission or parole, and his continued detention under that statute is unlawful. Although Respondents may have been able to lawfully detain Petitioner under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), they instead detained him under § 1225(b) and have still failed to provide Petitioner with the individualized bond hearing that he is entitled to. The Court will not correct Respondents' unlawful application of § 1225(b) and detention of Petitioner by converting Petitioner's detention to a "potentially lawful alternate form under a different statute with different procedural requirements and rules." Fajardo-Nugra v. Soto, No. 26-975, 2026 WL 579192, at *2 (D.N.J. Mar. 2, 2026) (granting Petitioner's habeas petition and ordering Petitioner's release based on the Government's flawed application of § 1225(b)(2).) Accordingly, it is ORDERED that, subject to the following, Petitioner's Petition is GRANTED and Respondents shall RELEASE Petitioner within twenty-four (24) hours of the entry of this Text Order, under the same conditions, if any, that existed prior to his detention. It is further ORDERED that Respondents shall return to Petitioner all personal property belonging to Petitioner - including but not limited to, any driver's license, passport, immigration documents, currency, or cellphone - that was seized at the time of detention. It is further ORDERED that Respondents are permanently enjoined from detaining Petitioner under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2) which the Court has found in inapplicable to him. And it is further ORDERED that Respondents shall not arrest, detain, or otherwise take Petitioner into custody under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) for a period of 14 days following his release, so as to ensure full effectuation of this Court's judgment and to prevent circumvention of the relief granted. It is finally ORDERED that if Respondents contend that this matter is factually distinguishable from Sandhu, they shall file an expedited answer to the Petition within three (3) days of the date of this Text Order, and Petitioner may file a reply within three (3) days of receipt of the expedited answer. So Ordered by Judge Brian R. Martinotti on 04/21/2026. (lr, ) (Entered: 04/21/2026)

Apr 21, 2026

Text Order

#4

Apr 22, 2026

Notice of Appearance

#5

Apr 22, 2026

Letter

#6

Apr 23, 2026

Order of Dismissal