After more than four years behind bars, Reginamary Chellamani walked closer to freedom as the Supreme Court on Wednesday granted her regular bail in a serious narcotics case involving alleged commercial quantity recovery. The top court set aside a Madras High Court order that had earlier refused her bail, citing prolonged incarceration and parity with a co-accused.
The order was passed by a bench of Justices Sanjay Kumar and K. Vinod Chandran.
Background of the Case
Reginamary Chellamani was arrested in 2021 in connection with a case registered by the Customs Department. She was accused of offences under multiple provisions of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, along with Section 135 of the Customs Act, 1962.
According to the prosecution, contraband above the “commercial quantity” threshold was allegedly recovered from her possession while she was travelling by air. The case is being tried before a special NDPS court in Chennai.
In July 2025, the Madras High Court declined to grant her regular bail. Challenging that decision, Chellamani approached the Supreme Court through a criminal appeal.
What the Court Considered
At the hearing, the Supreme Court took note of the length of time the appellant had already spent in custody. The bench recorded that Chellamani had been in jail for 4 years, 1 month, and 28 days without the trial being concluded.
The judges also noted an important factor - another accused who had been travelling on the same flight and was similarly placed had already been granted bail by the Supreme Court.
“Given the length of incarceration already suffered by the appellant, and considering that an identically situated accused has been granted bail, we are inclined to grant the same relief,” the bench observed.
Court’s Observations on Legal Representation
Beyond the bail issue, the Supreme Court made strong observations about the responsibility of trial courts to ensure that accused persons are aware of their right to legal representation.
The bench noted that Chellamani did not cross-examine prosecution witnesses at the initial stage. It was only later, after engaging her own lawyer, that she sought and obtained permission to re-examine them.
Highlighting this concern, the court said trial courts must clearly inform accused persons of their right to a lawyer, including the availability of free legal aid if they cannot afford counsel.
“It is incumbent upon trial courts to record the offer of legal aid, the response of the accused, and the action taken, before commencing examination of witnesses,” the judges stated, adding that this procedure must be followed “scrupulously”.
The Supreme Court directed that this order be circulated to the Chief Justices of all High Courts so that appropriate instructions are issued to trial courts across states.
The Decision
Allowing the appeal, the Supreme Court set aside the Madras High Court’s order dated July 24, 2025.
Reginamary Chellamani was granted regular bail, subject to stringent conditions to be fixed by the trial court. She has been directed to surrender her passport and cooperate fully during the trial without seeking unnecessary adjournments.
The bench clarified that it had not made any observations on the merits of the case and that its findings were limited strictly to the issue of bail.
The trial court has been asked to conclude the trial at the earliest.
Case Title: Reginamary Chellamani v. State (Superintendent of Customs)
Case No.: Criminal Appeal arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 18886 of 2025
Decision Date: February 5, 2026
