The court held that for a young offender (19 years old) possessing a non-commercial quantity of narcotics, the opportunity for reform and rehabilitation outweighs the impact of prior juvenile antecedents in granting regular bail.

****

SANJAY VASHISTH, J.

1. The instant petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 439 Cr.P.C.), for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, during the pendency of trial, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunder:-

2. Case of the prosecution is that on 14.04.2026, while police party was on patrol duty in search of anti-social elements, they noticed a young boy who, upon seeing the police officials, turned back and attempted to throw away a polythene bag that he was carrying in his right hand. He was immediately apprehended and disclosed his name as Mandeep Singh @ Gauri (petitioner herein). Upon checking the polythene bag allegedly thrown by him, 7 grams of heroin was recovered.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further contended that alleged recovery of 7 grams of heroin falls within the category of non-commercial quantity under the provisions of the NDPS Act.

4. Counsel further submits that petitioner has remained inside jail since 14.04.2026, i.e., for a period of three months and twenty-two days. It is argued that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner incarcerated for an indefinite period, particularly when the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. Thus, learned counsel prays that petitioner be granted the concession of regular bail in the present case.

5. In response to the arguments addressed by learned counsel for the petitioner, learned State counsel, produces the custody certificate dated 06.08.2026 in Court today, which is taken on record. Office to tag the same at appropriate place. A copy thereof has been handed over to the counsel for the petitioner.

As per the custody certificate, in the present case, petitioner has already undergone 03 months and 22 days period inside jail.

6. Learned State counsel, while opposing the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that petitioner does not deserve the concession of regular bail, as apart from the present case, petitioner is also involved in another case under the NDPS Act. On this basis, learned State counsel prays for dismissal of the present petition.

7. This Court has heard the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and has carefully perused the record available before it.

8. It is not in dispute that the alleged recovery from the petitioner is 7 grams of heroin, which is a non-commercial quantity and is only 2 grams in excess of the prescribed small quantity of 5 grams. It has also been brought to the notice of this Court that petitioner was earlier involved in another case under the NDPS Act. At the relevant time, he was a juvenile and had pleaded guilty in the said case. Although it was expected that petitioner would reform and refrain from indulging in similar activities, he has again come to be implicated in the present case, which undoubtedly involves a serious offence. However, considering that petitioner is only 19 years of age and the quantity allegedly recovered from him is non-commercial in nature, this Court is of the considered view that he deserves one more opportunity to reform and rehabilitate himself as a responsible member of society.

9. Having regard to the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, nature of the allegations, quantity of the contraband allegedly recovered, age of the petitioner, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to extend the concession of regular bail to the petitioner in the present case. Consequently, prayer made in the present petition is allowed.

Petitioner is ordered to be