High Court · 2025

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public prosecutor, High Court Complex, High Court, at Hyderabad ...RespondenUComplainant Petition under section 483 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the lr/emorandum of Grounds of criminal petition, the High court may be pleased to enlarge the bail to the petitioner/Accused No.3 in connection with crime no.712 of to the satisfaction of the Learned xlll Addl Metropolitan Magistrate, Medchal-Malkajgiri District at Kukatpally. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of sri B. RAMULU, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Additional public prosecutor (TG) on behalf of the Sole Respondent. The Court made the following: ORDER .^.*' THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.2599 of 2O2S ORDER: The present Criminal Petition is fi1ed, seeking the Court to enlarge the petitioner, on bail, who is arrayed as accused No.3 in Crime No.712 of 2024 of Balanagar Police Station, Cyberabad Commissionerate. The oflences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 8 (c) r/w.20 (b) (ii) (C) and 29 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'NDPS ActJ.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 31.70.2024 on reliable information that at about 17:OO- 17.3O hours, there would be exchange of illegally trafficked prohibited drug Hashish oi1 behind TGS RTC bus stop near Vimal theatre, the police conducted raid and they found three persons aged between 30 to 40 in suspicious manner. In the meanwhile two persons came on Pulsor bike duly making the contraband in one carry bag and when they were in conversion, immediately they approached suspected persons and seized the Hashish Oil from the possession of accused weighing 2 lttiittt

2.590 kgs. Basing on the complaint, the police registered the case for the abovc offences against the accused.

3. Heard Sri B.Ramulu, learned counsel for the petitioner and Learned Additional Public prosecutor, appearing for the respondent-Sta te.

4. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that pe[itioner is innocent of the said offences and he has nothing to do with the allegations and he is falsely implicated in this case u,ith a malafide intention. petitioner was not in possession of contraband and nothing was recovered from him. Petitioner is in judicial custody since O1.11.2024 and that material part of investigation is already completed except filing of charge sheet. This is the third bail application. As such prayed the Court to grant bail to the petitioner.

5. On the other hand, learned Additional Public prosecutor opposed bail stating that the seized quantity is 2.590 kgs of Hashish oil ',r,hich is a commercial quantity, as 1 kg itself is a commercial quantity. In view of rigor of Section 37 of the 3 NDPS Act, petitioner is not entitled for bail. As such prayed to d ismiss t his bail pelilion.

6. In support of his contentron, learned Additional Public Prosecutor relied upon the judgment of the t{on'ble Supreme Court in Narcotics Control Bureau v. Kashifl , wherein in paragraph No.40, it is held as under: "4O. The impugned order based on the inferences and surmises, in utter disregard of the statLltorl' provision of the Act and in utter disregard of the mandate contained in Section 37 of the Act, and granting bail to the accused mercly on tbe groun(l that the compliance of Section 52A was no[ done within reasonable time, is highly erroneous and d,eserves to be quashed and set aside. Since, the Fligh Court has not considered the application ol the respondent on merits and has also not considered the mandatory requirement under Section 37(1)(b) of the Act, we deem it appropriate to remand the casc to the Iligh Court for deciding the bail applrcation of the respondent afresh on merits and in accordancc rvith lara,. " 7 . Considering the submissions made by both the counsel and the material on record, the contraband seize<l in this case is huge quantity. At this stage, it is pertinent to note Section 37 ofthe NDPS Act, and the same reads as under: 12024 SCC OnLine SC 3848 'li r-. 4 "37. Offences to be cogni:able and non- ballable- - (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of l97a),- (a) every offence pnnishable undcr thrs Act shall be cognizable; (t ) no pcrson accused of an offence punishable for lfoffences undcr section 19 or section 24 or section 27A ar.d also for offences involving commercial quantity] shall be rcleased on bail or on his own bond unle ss (i) the Public Prosccutor has been given al opportunity to oppose the application for such release, and (ii) r,r" here the Public Prosecutor opposes the application, the court is satisfied that there are reasonablc grounds for beireving that he is not guilty of such offence and that he is not likelY to commit anv offence rvhi]e on bail. (2) The limitations on granting of bail specificd in clause (b) of sub section (l) ar-e in addition to the limitations under the Code of Crirnrrral Proceclure, 1973 12 of 1974) or any other lalv for the time being in force on grarrting of ba il. "

8. In vierv thereof, Section 37 of the NDpS Act mandates that offences involving commercial quantities be non-bailable, requiring reasonable grounds to believe that the accused is not guilty and unlikely to commit further offences while on =r.d. _.s 5 bail. In the lacts and circtlmstances of lhc ccsc orr hand, Lhis Court is not satished that conditions for granting bail under Section 37 are met' Further' as per the judgtnent oi the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Narcotics Control Bureau (supra)' wherein it is held that bail should not be granled if lhe procedure is not followed, particularly with rcspect to the statutory provisions of the NDPS Act' Therefore' the Criminal Petition lacks merit and the same is liable to be dismisscd' 9 Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed Miscellaneous applications, if any pcnding' shall stand closed. I To //TRUE COPY// Sd/- K AMMAJI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR \ ! I SECTION OFFICER

1. The Xlll Additional Metropolitan Magistrate at Kukatpally, Cyberabad 2. The Station House Officer, Balanagar Police Station, Cyberabad Cmmissionerate.

3. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court, at Hyderabad. (OUT) 4. One CC to SRl. BONDEMPALLY RAMULU Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CD Copies RC/PR .rfl. / ( HIGH COURT DATED: 0710312025 ORDER CRLP.No.2599 of 2025 t\E:i r,\i€ ,$ o 2 B APt1 2025 i D,i ACCORDINGLY, THE CRIMINAL PETITION IS DISMISSED g 1-r5 v./4-: ,/s,/1,