The High Court · 2025

State of Telangana, represented by P.P. for the High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad. Res po ndenUCom pla ina n t Petition under Section 528 of BNSS., praying that in ttre circumstances stated in the [Vlemorandum of Grounds of criminal petrtion, the High court may be pleased to release the Petitiorrers/A4 to 46 on bail in cr. No. 43g of 2024 of Kacheguda Police station, Hyderabad. and pass such other order or orders as deem fit and proper. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the l/emorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of sri p. prabhakar Reddy, Advocate for the Petitioners and the of Sri Syed yasan lvlanoon, learned Addl Public Prosecutor (TG) on behalf of the Respondent. The Court made the following: ORDER .'-:4..,. :E:E lqrc!=Ez{ / THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.1OO1 of 2o25 ORDER: Seeking the Court to enlarge the petitioners who are arrayed as accused Nos.4 to 6 in Crime No.438 of 2024 of Kachiguda Police Station, Hyderabad, on bail, the present Criminal Petition is filed.

2. The brief facts of the case are that on 23.11.2024, the Sub- Inspector oi Kachiguda Police Station received credible information ;r about the trilnsportation of ganja from Andhra Pradesh to Hyderabad. Upon investigation, seven individuals were taken into cuslody at the Kachiguda railway station parcel ofhce, along with gunny bags cor-rtaining 114 kg of ganja. The accused confessed to transporting the ganja, revealing that Accused Nos. 1 to 3 had procured it lrom Lhe Andhra-Orissa border and Accused Nos.4 to 7 helped transport it to Hyderabad for sale.

3. Heard Sri P. Prabhakar Reddy, learned counsel appearing on behalf the petitioners as well as Sri Syed Yasan Manoon, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated for 1 2 sKs,J Crl.P.No.1OOl of 2025 statistical purposes and that they reside in Anakapalli, Vishakapatanam district, and deny the involvement in purchasing and transporting ganj a from the Andhra-Orissa border to Hyderabad. He further submitted that although accused No. 1 confessed to procuring ganja with accused Nos.2 and 3, the role of the petitioners in assisting them is unclear. He further submitted that the petitioners were implicated based on confession of accused No.l, which does not indicate their involvement in purchasing ganja. The sub-inspector seized four bags of ganja at Kachiguda railway station, but it is unclear who possessed them, as there are seven accrised. The petitioners argue that the prosecution lailed to follow procedures under the NDPS Act, including seizing ganja, arresting the accused, and preparing inventory and samples. Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant bail to the petitioner by allowing this Criminal Peti tion.

5. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners stating that the petitioners are drug peddlers. He further submitted that the investigation is in progress and if the petitioners are released on bail, at this stage, they may tamper with the evidence and may threaten the witnesses. Hence, he prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition. 3 sKs,J Crt.P.No.1OOl of 2025

6. This Court, considering submissions macle by both the learned counsel and reviewing the record, it is noted that the contention of the petitioners that the case is false, hctitious, and fabricated, thc case rvas registered without following the due procedure. Hou,ever, the Additional Public Prosecutor opposes bail citing commercial quantity approximately i 14 kgs of ganja and further the petitioner is involved in other three cases. At this stage, it is pertrnent to note Section 37 of the NDPS Act, which reads as under: I I , I , "37. Offr:nces to be cognizable and non-bailable. -- (1) Notrvithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Pr-occclure, 1973 12 ol l97a\,--(a) even. offence punishable under this Act shall be cognizable; (b) no person accused of an offence punishable for 1[offenccs un(ler section 19 or section 24 or sec|iorr 274 and also for offences involving commercial quantityl shall be released on bail or on his own bond unless-- {i) the Public Prosecutor has been given an opportunity to oppose the application for such release, and (ii) rvhere the Prrblic Prosecutor opposes the application, rhc c 'u'l is satrshed lhat there are reasonable grounds for believing that he is not guilty of such offence and that he is not likeh to commit any offence while on bail. (2) Ttre limitations on granting of bail specihed in clause (b) of sub section (1) are in addition to the limitations under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 12 of 19741 or any other law for the time being in force on granting of bail." 4 sl<s,J C.l.P.No.1OOl of2025

7. In view thereof, Section 37 of the NDpS Act mandates that offences involving commercial quantities be non-bailable, requiring reasonabie grounds to believe the accused is not guilty and unlikely to commit further offences while on bail. Given the serious allegations and pending cases against the petitioners, this Court is not satisfied that conditions for granting bail under Section 37 are met. Therefore, the criminal petition lacks merit and the same is liable to be dismissed.

8. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is dismissed Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. Sd/- P. PADMANABHA REDDY " ASS T REGISTRAR \ To, ,TRUE COPY// TION OFFICER '1 . The lV Addl. Chief t\4etropolitan tVlagiskate at Nampally, Hyderabad 2 The Station House Officer, Kachiguda Police Station, Hyderabad District.

3. One CC to Sri P. Prabhakar Reddy, Advocate [OPUC] 4 Two CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court for the State of Telangana at HYderabad [OUT] 5 Two CD copies BJLB HIGH COURT DATED:1810212025 ORDER CRLP.No.1001 of 2025 , CRIMINAL PETITION IS DISMISSED Al b led . ',1. - l, 1,li r.i Cc e J3 2 ri fltAR 2U5 7 ?_o * i/- 'ATCH t o