Accused entitled to bail on ground of parity with co-accused in NDPS Act proceedings.

The applicant, Anshul Rawat, was arrested and has been in custody since September 18, 2025, in connection with F.I.R./Case Crime No. 295 of 2025.

The charges were registered under Sections 8, 20, 29, and 60 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (N.D.P.S.) Act at P.S. Raipur, District Dehradun.

The applicant moved his first bail application before the High Court, asserting false implication and seeking parity with co-accused Priyanshu Negi and Gautam Uniyal, who were previously granted bail by the same Court.

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to the grant of regular bail on the grounds of parity with co-accused who have already been enlarged on bail.

2. Whether procedural irregularities and non-compliance with the mandatory provisions of the N.D.P.S. Act are material considerations that outweigh the stringent conditions of Section 37 of the Act.

The Court considered Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act, which prescribes stringent twin conditions for bail.

It relied upon the precedent in Narcotics Control Bureau v. Kashif (2024) 11 SCC 372, which establishes that while Section 37 is rigorous, courts must examine serious procedural lapses that undermine the prosecution's credibility.

Furthermore, the Court applied the judicial principle of parity in the matter of granting bail.

The Court noted the applicant's contention regarding procedural non-compliance and the duration of his incarceration since September 2025.

The primary basis for the Court’s reasoning was the fact that co-accused Priyanshu Negi and Gautam Uniyal had already been granted bail in BA1 No. 2156 of 2025 and BA1 No. 60 of 2026, respectively.

The Court observed that the applicant’s case mirrored that of the co-accused.

Without expressing an opinion on the underlying merits of the evidence, the Court determined that the applicant was entitled to the same relief based on the doctrine of parity, provided he followed specific conditions to ensure the integrity of the trial.

It held that the applicant, Anshul Rawat, is entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity.

The Court directed his release upon the execution of a personal bond and two reliable sureties of like amount, subject to conditions: (i) regular attendance at the trial Court; (ii) no inducement or threat to witnesses; and (iii) no travel outside India without prior permission.

The Court further clarified that any violation of these conditions would allow the informant to seek cancellation of bail.