The High Court · 2025

"oinection ThisPetitioncomingonforhearing,uponperusingtheMemorandumof Grounds of criminar petiti"on and no representation on beharf of the Petitioner andHeardMr.SyedY""'ft'f*oon'AdditionalPublicProsecutor'HighCourtfor the State of Telangana' Hyderabad on behalf of the State / Respondent' The Court made the following: ORDER: i I l I I I t I ! t I I l : I i I I I I " ,.;dr _'r" rt- TITE TTON'E}LE SFTT JUSTTCE J.SREENI\/AS RAO ONN CFIIM rI\IAL PE o-839 8of 2025 TITI ORDER: This Crirninal petition has been file<i under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2()23 (for short, ,BNllS,) by the petitioner/ accused No.4, seeking anticipatorlz bail in connection with Crime No.123 of 2024 on the file oi' the Station House Officer, Kethepally police Station, N:rlgonda District registered for- the offences Sections a(c) r/w 2o(b)(ii)(c) ancl 29 ot Psyci-roLropic Substances Act, punishable under [he NarcoLic Drugs and 1985 (for short .NDpS Act,)

2. When lhe matter is taken up for hearing today in the morning hours, at request ol- the lcarncd counsel for Lhe petitioner, the rrratter was passed over. In the afternoon, there is no rcpresentation on behalf of the petitioner either physic--al mode or virtual mode.

3. Heard Mr. Syed yasar Mamoon, learnerl Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent_ State

4. The case of prosecution in brief is that accused Nos.1 to 3 u,ere found in possession of 73.g25 kgs. of 1 ,: galrja, while they were transporting the sarne in white color-rr Verna car belonging to Uttar Pradesh State from Suryapet side towards Hyd'erabad and ttrey were arrested and seized the contraband from tkreir possession' 5. Learned Additional Pr-rblic Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner kras comrnitted the grave offence and the police seized contraband i'e' 73 825 kgs of ganj a, which is commercial quantity He further su'bmitted that the absconding from the daLc of registration of 16.O7.2(024 ancl the investigat.ron is under the petitioner is not entitled for grant of petitioner 1S crirne r-e. 1n progress. Hence' anticiPatorY bail' This Court considercd the subn-rissions madc by 6. the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and perused the rnaterial available on record As per the provisions of the NDPS Act, 1 kg rs small quantity and 20 kgs is cornmercial quantity and in the casc on hand' the police serzed tkre contraband i.e. 73.a25 kgs' of ganja' whicLr is in commercial qr'rantity' The record further discloses that accrrsed Nos'1 to 3 were arrested on 17 'O7 '2024 and the Investigation ofhcer after completion of investiga'tion frled charge sheet on 30'O5'2O25 before the I Additional District l I I j I I I ! I t t t I I I I I I I ) I I I I I I I I I I I I , I j I I i: "r?*.+c=7 and Sessio.s Judge at Nalgonda, in respect of acc,sed Nos. 1 to .3, and accr-rsed Nos.4 and 5 were shown as absconding lrorn the date of registration of thc crirrle i.e

76.O7.2O2,t.

7. At this stage, it is pertinent to note Section 37 of the NDPS Act, u,hich reads as under: "3/. Offences to be cognizable and non_brdlable - (l ) Notwithstanding anything contained in Lher Code of Criminal procedure, 1973 (2 ot t9/4), -(a) everlz oflence purlishable under Llrr; Act shau be cognizable; no person accused of ar_r offen<:e fl)r pr-rlishable for 1 [offences under section 19 or section 24 or section 27A ar,cl also for offencers involving commercial quantrtv] shall be rcle'ased on bail or or.r his or,vn bond unlcss tfre public prosecu tor has been giver.r [i) arr opportunity to oppose the application for such release, and (r'f ,.r,here Lhe public prosecutor ol)poses thc application, the court is satisfied thar, theru are reasonablc grounds for believing that hc is not guilty of such offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. (2J 'lhc limitations on granting of bail specified in clausc (b) of sub-section (1) are in adclition to the limitations under the Code of Crim inal. procedure, 1973 (2 of lg74) or a'..y ,)rl r law Br tf," rime being in l-or"" o' 4 granting of bajl " a. ln view tkrereof ' Section 37 of the NDPS Act mandates tkrat offences involving commercial quantities be non-krailable' requiring reasonable grounds to believe the accused is not gu'ilty and unlikely Lo commit further offences while on bail' I . At this stage ' it is pertinent to observe that the Courts exercise car'rtion while dealing with anticipatory bail pctitions in NDPS cases dr.e to the serious natlrre of tkrese offences Granting a-nticipatory baii in regular manner rnay harnper the investigation' allow the accused to abscond' and ,ndermine p,bric interest in preventing and controlling these offences '

10. '= as a matter of rotltinc That being so, the Hon'ble SuPreme Court has consistently held that anticipatory bail should not be ln the case granted in NDPS case of Tarabai ws' State of Maharashtral' the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that the grant of anticipatory bail in NDPS cases rrray Lrarnper tkre investigation and enable the accr'rsed to destrtoy evidence. Similarly, in the case of Kishore Sarnrite vs. State of Uttar Pradesh2' the Hon'ble Supreme 1[1983) 2 SCC 68 , (2012) 10 scc 632 : I I I I I ! , 5 Court reiterated t in NDpS cases as hat anticipatory bail should a matter of course. not be granted 1 1. In Jight of the aforesaid judicial pronouncements and statutory provisions, and mindful o1. the fact that the grant of pre .rrrest bail at a srage when the ,rr""r;;"..* sl ill in progrr.ss, rnay tmpede the investigative process and potentially pr-ejudice the case of the prosecution, observes that therc ar(.no mr.rits in this criminal perition to granl pre_arrest bail to the petitioner and the sar qrlu Lrre same is liable to be dismissed. t2 Act:r_,rdingly, this Criminal petition is rlismissed As a scquei thereto, miscellaneous applications, if a.ny, pcnding in tl-ris petition stand closed //TRUE COPYII S A. REENIVASA REDDY STANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER The Judicial l\ilagistrate of First Class, Nakrekal, onda District The Station House Officer, cKethapally Police Station, Nalgonda District One CC to Sri. Venkat Reddy Kodumury, Advocate [OPUC] ffi CCNo the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Tetangana, Hyderabad [OUT] Two CD Copies To,

2. 3 4 E PSI(gh VK HIGH COURT DATED:15 t}tIZO2S ORDER CRLP.No.8398 of 2025 f. .) 2 0 SEP Zom ]' ,;,1 .rj". i l' DISMISSED THE CRIMINAL PETITION grCe,\ w-<^u 6{t l i i t I I