The High Court · 2025

Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the ltilemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the petitioner/Accused No.5 on Anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest ln connection wrth Crime No. 58 of 2025. P.S. Excise : Dhoolpet, District : Hyderabad This Petition coming on for hearing,upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Gulab Singh ,Advocate for the Petitioner and Sri Syed Yasar Mamoon, learned Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent-State. The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SII IANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.1O123 of 2Or 15 ORDER: This Criminal Petition is hled for grant of : -e-arrest bail to the peti[ioner, who is arrayed as accused I{ r.5 in Crime No.58 of 2025 before Dhoolpet Police StatiorL Hy'derabad, registered for the offences punishable under Scc r rns 8(c) read ri.ith 20(b)(ii)(B) of NDPS Act, 1985.

2. The brief facts of the case are that, on l) LO7.2O25 at 10:50 AM, the Prohibition & Excise Sub-lnspect rr, Dhoolpet, Hyderabad, received credible information regarclir g possession and sale of ganja at rented premises bearing I.No 13-O 1- 1Ol9 I I, Balramgally, Upper Dhoolpet, Hydera[,i d. Pursuant thereto, LW- 1 along with staff proceeded to the i aid location, apprehended Accused Nos. 1 to 4, and effectecl sci ;ure of 1.146 Kgs of dry ganja from the premises and 1.040 lgs from the vehicle of A4, totaling 2.186 Kgs. The contrabar-r I u,as seized under cover of Panchanama based on the confe; iion of A1 to A4. Upon completion of procedural formalities, th: accused and seized material were handed over to the Station ouse Officer, Excise Dhoolpet, for further investigation. Subs;r quently, the 2 accused were arrested and produced before the Honble I Additionai Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, and remanded to judicial custody. At the time of registration of the case, Accused No.5 was shown as absconding and cited.

3. Heard Sri Gulab Singh, learned counsel for petitioner, and Sri Syed Yasar Mamoon, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent - State.

4. Learned counsel for the pctitioner submitted that petitioner is physically handicapped and has placed on record the relevant disability certificate. He asserted that petitioner has no connection whatsoever wrth the alleged offence and has been falsely implicated by the respondent police with malahde intent and for statistical purposes. Therefore, prayed this Court to allow this criminal Petition.

5. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner stating that the investigation is in progress and if the petitioner is released on bai1, at this stage, he may tamper with the evidence and may threaten the witnesses. Hence, he prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition. 3

6. Having regard to the rival submissions r ade and on going through the malerial placed on record, i',. s noted that the Iimited grievancc of learned counsel for tht petitioner is that the petitioner was falsely implicated in the cr sc, u'hereas, it is the specilic stand of learned Additional Publ c Prosecutor that petitioner is actively involved with the allegec rffe n ce.

7. At this stage, it is pertinent to observe the t the: Courts exercise caution u.hile dealjng with anlicipaton' rail petitions in NDPS cascs due lo the serious nature of i.. r :se offcnces. Granting anticipatory bail in regular manner mzrJ hamper the investigation, :rllow the accused to abscond, arL I undermine public intcrest in preventing and controlling thesc rffences. ti. The Honble Supreme Court has consistcn ly held that anticipatory bail should not be granted in NDI'I CASES AS malLer of routine, as the same may hamper thc investigation and enable the accused to destroy evidence. F r.r 'the r, in the case of Anarul SK v. State of West Bengalr the Hon'ble \ Supreme Court observed that grant of anticipatorT bail in cases irrvolving NDPS is a very serious issue. / 1 Petition for Special Leave to Appeal rcn.fio.1,262L12O24 dated 19.09.2C 14 I I i I I I ! i : i ()

9. In light of the above discussion, this Court is of the opinion that the grant of pre-arrest bail at a stage when the investigation is still in progress, may impede the investigative process and potentially prejudice the qase of the prosecution, as such, there are no merits in this criminal petition to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. 1O. How.ever, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court deems it ht to direct the petitioner to surrender before the I Additional Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, and file a petition seeking regular bail. Furthcr, on hling of such petition, the trial Court is directed to consider the same as expcditiously as possible and pass appropriate orders in accordance with 1 1. With the above directions, this Criminal petition is disposed of Miscellaneous petitions, pending, if any, shall stand closed SD/. M. JAWAHAR REDDY TANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFIC ER To, 1 . The Station House Officer, dhoolpet, Hyderabad ' 2. one CC to Sri Gulab Singh, Advocate [OPUC] 3. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana' Hyderabad. [OUT]

4. Two CD CoPies EPRigh '::-:F--.ia'E 'i:.:-a HIGH COURT DATED:21 10812025 l \ ORDER CRLP.No.10123 of 2025 ..: ( o 5 l'i 4 0 t, Iflfi t( z (,) I o o \. 'J- '\_. a.'. DISPOSING THE CRL.PETITION. 81t\