The High Court · 2025

3. Vanamoju Bala, s/o Vanamoja Ramachary, Aged 26 years, Caste- BC , occ- Private Job, r/o PIot No. 45, Sri Sai Nagar, Near Hanuman Temple, Sainikpuri. WC tt/alkajgiri ..PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1 TO 3 AND The State of Telangana, through S.H.O., Malkajgiri Poh and Excise Station, Medchal Malkajgiri District, rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court, Hyderabad .,.RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Petition under Section 480 & 483 o't BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the petitioners herein on bail in connection with COR No.54 of 2025 on the file of SHO, Malkajgiri Proh. and Excise Station, Medchal Malkajgiri District This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri BATHINI UPENDAR, Advocate for the Petitioner and SRI SYED YASAR MAMOON, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR on behalf of the Sole Respondent The Court made the following: ORDER TTIE HONOURABLE SRI.IUSf'ICE J. SRTIINIYAS RAO (IRIMINAL P[,TITION No.8426 of 2()25 ()RDE,R: 'lhis Crirninal Petition is liled under. Seetions 480 and 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhitha, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') seeking bail to the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to i in COR No.54 of 2025 on the file of the Prohibition and Excise Station, Malkajgiri. registered for the otTence: pi.'ishable under Sectior.r 8(c) r/w. Seclion 22 (c) and 20 (b) (ii) (A) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (lor short 'NDPS Act').

2. The casc of the prosecution is that on 20.06.2025, the petitioners were lbund in possession ol 22.10 gms. of MDMA and 6.60 gms. of OG Kush and the same was seized. Basing on the san1e, COR No.54 of 2025 was registered.

3. Heard N{r.Bathini Upendar, learned counsel lor the petitioners and Mr.Syed Yasar Mamoon, learned Additional Public Prqsecutor for the respondent-State. 2

4. I-earned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have not corrrnitted the offence and they were falsely implicated in the above said crime. He lurther subrnitted that the Police without following the mandatory procedure prescribed under the provisions ol the NDPS Act, scized the contraband. He further submitted that the atleged contraband was seized from the possession of accused Nos.l and 4 only. Accused Nos.2 and 3 were implicated in the present crirne, though they are not present at the scene of offence and no rccovery was made from their possession by the police. He further subrnitted that the petitioners were arrested on

20.06.2025 and since then they were in judicial custody. He further submitted that the petitior.rers shati abide by the conditions, which are going to be imposed by this Court, and they are ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation and abide by the conditions which are going to be imposed by this Court. Hence, the petitioners may be enlarged on bail

5. Per contra, Icarned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the same. He suhmittcd that the contraband seized from the possession of petitioners is commercial quanti{.y and the investigation is under 3 progress. Ilence, at this stage, the petitioners are not entitled for grant of bail.

6. Flaving considered the rival submissions made by the re'spective parties and after perusal o I' the material available on record, it reveals that the police seized 22. 10 grarns of MDMA, u,hich is comnrercial quantity and 6.60 grarns of OG Kush, which is intermediary quantity. As per the provisions of NDPS Act, 0.5 grams of MDMA is the small quantity. Everr according to the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, the investigation is under progress. At this stage, it is pertinent to note Section 37 of the NDPS Act, which reads as under "37. Offences to be cognizable and non-baitable. - (l) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure , 1973 (2 ol 197 4),--(a) every offence punishable under this Act shall be cognizable; (b) no person accused of an ollbnce punisl.rable for I [of'fences under section i9 or section 24 or section 27.\ and also for oflences involving conrmercial quantity] shall be released on bail or on his own bond unless-- 4 (i) the Public Prosecutor has been given an opportunity to oppose the application for such release, and (ii) where the Public Prosecutor opposes the application, the couI1 is satisfied that there are reasonablc grounds for believing that he is not guilty of such offcrrce and that he is not likely to comrnit any oflence white on bail. (2) The limitations on granting of bail specified in clause (b) of sub-section (l) are in addition to the limitations under the Code of Crinrinal Procedure, 1973 (2 ol 1974) or any othel law lor the time being in force on granting of bail."

7. In view thereof, Scction 37 of the NDPS Act rnandates that offences involving commercial quantities be non-bailable, requiring reasonable grounds to believe tl're accused is not guilty and unlikely to comrnit further ot-fences while on bail. Hence, since the allegations levelled against the petitioners are serious in nature, this Court is not satisfied that conditions for granting bail under Section 37 are met. Therefore, the crirninal petition lacks merit and the sarne is liabie to be dismissed

8. Accordirrgly, this Criminal Petition is disrnissed. J Miscellaneous applications, pending il any, shall stand closed. SD/- AHMED ABDULLA KHAN ASSISTANT REGISTRAR b SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY/i To,

1. The I Additional District and Session Judge, Medchal ltlalkajgiri District at Kushaiguda

2. The Station House Officer, Malkajgiri P&ESI Station, Malkajgiri, Medchal Malkajgiri District

3. One CC to SRI BATHINI UPENDAR Advocate IOPUC] 4. Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT]

5. Two CD Copies VM/ABK \3 HIGH COURT DATED: 23107l2Oits t ORDER CRLP.No.8426 of 2025 DISMISSING THE CRIMINAL PETITION * cas'gA {dar -r.6€ S iI o) _) 0l r{oll ut g},