When Justice Looks Beyond Quantity: A Thoughtful Bail Order in Davinder Singh’s Case

By Advocate Prabal Bhandari

In a significant bail ruling dated 5th May 2025, the Punjab & Haryana High Court granted regular bail to Davinder Singh, who had been in jail for over a year and 23 days in connection with a drug case under the NDPS Act, 1985.

But this wasn’t just another routine bail matter. This case tells us a deeper story — one that balances the letter of the law with the spirit of justice.

What Was the Case About?

Davinder Singh was arrested along with three others while traveling in a car. During a police checkpoint, the car was stopped and searched. The police found 255 grams of intoxicant powder hidden near the dashboard of the car. The NDPS Act classifies such an amount as "commercial quantity", which usually makes getting bail extremely difficult.

However, Davinder was not driving the car. He was just sitting in the back seat.

The Court's Reasoning: Justice, Not Just Punishment

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Moudgil looked at the case not with a cold lens of law, but with a humane eye. Here's why the Court decided to grant bail:

1. Long Custody: Davinder had already been in jail for more than 1 year and 23 days — with no end of trial in sight.

2. Marginally Over the Limit: Yes, the quantity was technically over the commercial limit, but only by a small margin. Courts in earlier cases have taken a lenient view in similar situations.

3. No Criminal Past: Davinder wasn’t a known criminal. He had no previous cases registered against him.

4. Co-accused Already Out on Bail: One of his co-accused, who was driving the car, had already been granted bail by the same Court a few days earlier.

5. Trial Moving Slowly: Out of 19 witnesses, only 4 had been examined, and 5 dropped — this meant the trial would take a lot more time.

In simple words, the judge believed that keeping Davinder locked up for years while the trial dragged on would not serve any meaningful purpose.

Legal Principles Cited

The Court didn’t stop at facts. It also referred to important legal precedents that say:

• Bail is the rule, jail is the exception.

• Every person is presumed innocent until proven guilty.

• Article 21 of our Constitution guarantees the right to a fair and speedy trial.

Quoting from cases like Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia, Dataram v. State of U.P., and Nikesh Tarachand Shah, the Court emphasized that bail should not be denied mechanically, especially when there's no threat to society from the accused.

A Gentle Reminder: Quantity Isn’t Everything

The judgment reminds us that justice isn't just about measuring grams and milligrams. Courts must also weigh circumstances, intent, past conduct, and the time already spent behind bars. Harsh laws like NDPS are meant to catch dangerous traffickers — not to endlessly punish someone who may have been at the wrong place at the wrong time.

Final Thoughts

As a practicing advocate, I find hope in judgments like these. They show us that the judiciary is willing to look at each case individually, with compassion, logic, and fairness. While the fight against drugs is crucial, we must not forget that justice means balance — not blind severity.

For those facing similar situations, this case shows that relief is possible, if your case is presented properly and the court is made aware of the full context, not just the contraband weight.

If you or someone you know is tangled in such a case, seek proper legal advice. Because sometimes, justice just needs to hear your side of the story.