Parity and maternal obligations justify regular bail despite seizure of commercial quantity under the NDPS Act.

On August 21, 2025, police seized 28.16g of Heroin from co-accused Manmohan @ Jaggu

Jaggu’s memorandum statement alleged that drug sale proceeds were deposited into the bank account of his wife, the applicant

On August 23, 2025, 09.43g of Heroin was recovered from the applicant's scooter (Activa)

While the individual recovery from the applicant was small, the total recovery from all co-accused amounted to 281.10g of Heroin, which constitutes a commercial quantity

The applicant, incarcerated since August 23, 2025, moved for regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, following the filing of the charge-sheet

Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, in a case involving a commercial quantity of contraband, based on parity, lack of antecedents, and humanitarian grounds

The Court applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, for the grant of regular bail

The applicant was charged under Sections 21(B), 21(C), 29, and 27(A) of the NDPS Act, and Section 111 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS)

The Court also considered the principle of parity and judicial discretion regarding custodial necessity when a minor child is involved

Procedural conditions for bail were governed by Sections 84, 269, 351, and 209 of the BNSS and BNS

The Court acknowledged that the total contraband seized (281.10g Heroin) exceeded the commercial quantity threshold, which generally restricts bail under the NDPS Act

However, the Court distinguished the applicant's case from co-accused Harsh Rathi (whose bail was rejected) by highlighting three factors: first, the principle of parity, as co-accused Jaspreet Kaur had been granted bail previously

second, the applicant had no prior criminal record under the NDPS Act

and third, a critical humanitarian ground—the applicant has a four-year-old child with no other caregiver available while the husband is also in custody

Given that the charge-sheet was already filed and the trial would take time, the Court determined that the applicant's continued incarceration was not warranted despite the commercial quantity involved

The Court held that despite the commercial quantity involved in the crime, the applicant was entitled to bail on grounds of parity, her clean criminal record, the completion of the investigation (filing of charge-sheet), and the necessity of caring for her minor child

The release was conditioned upon the execution of a personal bond with two sureties and strict adherence to trial proceedings, including a prohibition on seeking unnecessary adjournments