The High Court · 2025

Petition under Section 480 and 483 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the petitioner herein on bail in connection with FIR No. 1121 of 2024 of Chandanagar Police Station, R.R.District. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing lhe Memorandum of Grounds of Criminat Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Reddarnaina Thirupathi, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Additional Public Prosecutor (TG/AP) on behalf of the Respondent. The Court made the following Order:- C ORDER: THE HONOT'RABLE SMT WSTICE K. SUJAITA CRIMIITAL PETITION No.Zt4 of 2O2S FIR.No.l12t enlarge the The present Criminal petition is filed pray.ng this Court to petitioner who is arrayed as ar:cused No. I in of 2024 before the Chandanagar police Station Rangareddy l)istrict, registered for the offen,:es punishable under Secrions 8(c) read with 22 (cl, 2Z (a) and 29 of the Narcotic Dmgs Arrd psychotropic Substarrces .Act, 1985, (for short 'NDpSl on bail.

2. The brief facts of the case are tl,rat on October 31,2024, the police received credible information that an individual was in possession of MDMA, a prohibited substance, at House No.56, Gulmohar park Colony, Serlingampally. Acting swiftly on this intelligence, the ollicer intercepted tre accused at the specified location. Upon intercepfing the accused, the police conducted a seran ch and found 150 grams of MDMA in their possession. The, substalce was seized, and it was allegecl that the accused intended to sell it to customers. The accusecl was subsequently taken intc custody in connection wit.h the seizure 2 SKS,J Crl,P-No.7l4 of 2025 of the prohibited substance. Aggrieved thereby, this Criminal Petition is frled

3. Heard Sri R.Thimpathi, learned counsel for petitioner, and Sri Syed Yasar Mamoon, Iearned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of respondent - State.

4. karned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person who has been falsely implicated in the case, and has not committed any offence' He further submitted that tl.e petitioner, a native of Rajasthan, was wrongly apprehended by the police at his brother-in-law's residence in Lingampally, Hyderabad, on October 31,2024' despite pleading innocence. He contended that tlre police allegedly prepared a confessional statement without disclosing its contents and failed to comply with Sections 42,50, and 57 of the NDPS Act, 1985. He averred that the petitioner has been in jail since October 31, 2024, causing hardship and starvation to his family members and that despite liling two bail petitions, uide CrI.P.No.2399 of 2024 and CrI.P.No.152OZ of 2O24, whicll. were dismissed on December 4, 2024, and Januar5r 6' 2025, respectively, the petitioner is now seeking bail again, contending that the investigation is complete, and that there is no scope of 7 3 SKS,J Crl.P.No.714 of 2025 tampering wlth witnesses. Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant bail to the petitioner by allowing this criminal petition.

5. On the other hand, learned Additional hrblic prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner steLting that quantity of contraband seized by the Police from the possession of the accused is commercia_l quantity and that if the relief of bail is granted to the petitioner, there is every possibility of him committing similar offences. Therefore, preyed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition.

6. Having regard to the rival submissions made and on going through the nraterial placed on record, it is noted that the police seized 15O gms of MDMA from the possession of accused/petitioner, and the said quantity is a commercial quantigr. Tha1. being so, it is relevant to extract Section 37 of the NDPS Act, which reads as under: "37. Olfences to be cognizable and non-baitable. - - (1) Notvdthstanding anything contained in tl.e Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 12 of DZ!,--(al every offence punishable under tiis Act shall be cogrrizable; 4 SKSJ Crl.P.No.7l4 of 2O2S o [b) no person accused of an ofence punishable for I [olfences under section 19 or section 24 or section 27A and also for ofiences involving comrnercial quantityl sha[ be released on bail or. on his owrr bond unless-- (i) the Public prosecutor has been given aa opportunity to oppose t]le application for such release, and (ii) where the public prosecutor opposes the application, the court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that he is not guilty of such olfence and that he is not likely to cornmit any offence while on bail. (2) The limitations on granting of bajl specified in clause (b) of sub-section (l) are in addition to the li.mitations under tlle Code of Criminal kocedure, 1973 (2 of l974l or any other law for the time being in force on granting of bai1." 7 In view thereol, it is clear that Section 37 of the NDpS Act mandates that offences involving commercial quantities be 5 SKS,J Crl.P-No 714 of 2025 non-bailable, requiring reasonable grounds to believe that the accused is not guilty and unlikely to commit further offences while on ba:il. Given the serious set of allegalions leveled against the petitioner with regard to his involvement in possession of 150 gms of MDMA, this Court is not satished that conditions for granting bail under Section 37 are met. Further, the invesLigation in the case is yet to be completed. Therefore, the criminal pelition lacks merit and tJle same is liable to be dismissed.

8. Accordingly, this Criminal petition is dismissed. MiscelleLneous applications, if any pending, shalt stand closed. To ,/TRUE COPY// Sd/. P.CH. NAGABHUSHAMBA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ii'tl {i.tTION OFFICER 1 $" tI Additional Metropotitan Magistrate at Cyberabad. Kukatpaily. 2. The station House officer, chandanagar p.s.,'cyberabad cornmi6sionerate, 3. Two CCs to the pubtic prosecutor, Higlh Court foi the state oi iJring;;;,-'-' 4. One CC to Sri Reddamaina Thirupathi, Advocate [OPL,C] 5. Two CD Copies Hyderabad [OUTl. VC/PR tht S ,,., r o ( e) 3 1t tt| 7lti5 \i'\ i('' t ,. -. :. '' ( ) HIGH COURT DATED:2810112025 ORDER CRLP.No.714 of 2025 DISMISSING THE CRLP p{