Parity And Slow Trial prompt Rajasthan HC to grant NDPS Act Bail In Commercial Quantity

The Rajasthan High Court has reinforced the principle of parity and the right to a speedy trial by granting NDPS Act bail in commercial quantity of heroin where the prosecution's narrative rested primarily on disclosure statements. The ruling underscores that prolonged incarceration without substantial progress in trial proceedings, coupled with the release of similarly situated co-accused, warrants the exercise of judicial discretion in favor of liberty even under the stringent NDPS Act.

Justice Baljinder Singh Sandhu heard the bail application filed by the petitioner, who was arrested in 2024. The Rajasthan High Court scrutinized the role of the petitioner against the backdrop of co-accused who had already been enlarged on bail by coordinate benches.

Key Takeaways

Primacy of Parity

Reaffirms that if co-accused with similar or more significant roles are granted bail, the petitioner is entitled to the same relief to ensure consistency in judicial orders.

Impact of Trial Delays

Establishes that the examination of only one out of twenty-one witnesses over two years constitutes a slow trial, weighing heavily in favor of granting bail despite the nature of the contraband.

Limitation of Disclosure Statements

Highlights that when the prosecution's case is substantially built on statements under Section 67 of NDPS Act, the threshold for bail under Section 37 may be satisfied if no other prior criminal history exists.

NDPS Act Bail in Commercial Quantity of Heroin

The Rajasthan High Court observed that the contraband, weighing 820 grams of heroin, was initially found by one Hardeep Singh in his field, who later planned to sell it with the assistance of the petitioner and others. The petitioner was apprehended inside a vehicle while the main accused fled. The Bench noted that the entire story emerged from confessional statements and disclosures under Section 23(2) of BSA.

The Court reasoned that “In such circumstances, this Court finds that although there is material on record against the petitioner, the same, by itself, is not sufficient to deny bail to the petitioner, particularly considering the role attributed to the petitioner and fact that the case of the petitioner is on a similar footing to that of the co-accused, who has been enlarged on bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. Further, in view of the observations made hereinabove, this Court finds that there are reasonable ground for believing at this stage that the accused may not be guilty of the alleged offence and has made out a case for grant of bail. That apart, the petitioner has no criminal antecedents or previous criminal history which may indicate that he is likely to indulge in commission of offence while on bail. Hence, the twin conditions stipulated under Section 37 of the NDPS Act stand satisfied in the facts and circumstances of the present case.”

Ratio

The stringent 'twin conditions' for bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act are considered satisfied when the evidence against the accused is primarily based on disclosure statements of co-accused, the petitioner has no prior criminal history, and there is a documented lack of progress in the trial, especially when similarly situated co-accused have been previously granted bail.

Background

The dispute originated from F.I.R. No. 275/2024 at Police Station Khajuwala, involving Sections 8/21 and 29 of NDPS Act. The petitioner argued that he was merely implicated based on the confessional statement of Hardeep Singh, who allegedly found the heroin in his field. Counsel for the petitioner highlighted that co-accused Sachin Kumar and Parvindra Singh were granted bail on March 12, 2026, and April 28, 2026, respectively. The petitioner had been in custody since November 15, 2024. The Public Prosecutor opposed the bail but could not dispute the parity with the already released co-accused. The Court ultimately allowed the application, noting that trial conclusion would take considerable time given that only one out of twenty-one witnesses had been examined.

Case Details:
Case No.: S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 6654/2026
Neutral Citation: 2026:RJ-JD:43533
Case Title: Garbaj Singh v. State Of Rajasthan
Appearances:
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Rajendra Singh Chouhan, Advocate
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Urja Ram Kalbi, Public Prosecutor

Source: 2026 CaseBase(RAJ) 20832

Parity And Slow Trial prompt Rajasthan HC to grant NDPS Act Bail In Commercial Quantity of Heroin