Hyderabad High Court · 2025

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri. M. PHANINDRA BHARGAV, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Sri. Syed Yasar Mamoon, Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent. The Court made the following ORDER: THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJAI{A CRIMINAL PETITION No.1Ot99 of 2O2S ORDER: sr:eking the court to enlarge the petitioners who are arrayed as Accused Nos. I and 2 in c.o.R. No. 113 of 2o2s on the file of the Prol:ribition and. Excise Station, Bhadrachalam, on bail, the present criminal petition is filed. 2- Ttre brief facts of the case are that, on 09.o5.202s, on reliable information, at in front of old Sand ramp, Kunavaram Road, Bhadrachalam, the complainant and his staff apprehended the accrrsed persons while they were transporting the Ganja in Mahindra xuv 5o0 bearing registration No.RJ-27-UB-3055 and seized 67 -57o kgs of Ganja in presence of the mediators.

3. B*sing on the confession and seizure panchanama, the ProhibilLon and Excise station, Bhadrachalam registered a case in c.o.R No.113 of 2o2s for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) rea,l with 20 (b) (ir) (c) of NDpS Act against the accused persons 4- Ht:ard Mr. M.phanindra Bhargav, learned counsel for petitione:rs and sri syed yasar Mamoon, learned Additional public Prosecut-or for respondent State. 2 . SKS,J Crl.P.No. 10199 of 2025

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent of the alleged offence and have not committed any such offence as alleged by the police. It is further submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the case only with an intention to harass them. The petitioners have been in judicial custody for the past 54 days, and the material part of the investigation has already been completed. Therefore, the learned counsel prayed that this Court may be pleased to grant bail to the petitioners by allowing the present criminal petition'

6. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, contending that the alleged contraband involved is of a commercial quantity, and that the investigation is still pending. It was further contended that, since the petitioners are residents of the State of Rajasthan, it would be difficult to secure their presence during the course of the investigation and trial' Therefore,. the learned Additional Public Prosecutor prayed that this court may be pleased to dismiss the present criminal Petition.

7. Having considered the rival submissions and upon a careful perusal of the material placed on record, it is observed that the petitioners were remanded to judicial custody on O9'05 '2025' The record further reveals that the alteged contraband seized from the a tL 3 SKS, J Crl.P.No. IOl99 of 2O25 accusecl is of a commercial quantit5r, specifically 67.57o kilograms, and the investigation is still ongoing. At this stage, Section 3T of the Narcotic Drugs and psychotropic Substances Act, 19g5, is applicable as it specilically prohibits the grant of bail in offences involving commercial quantitJr unless stringent conditions are met. Since the investigation is incomplete and. there is no material to prima -facie establish the innocence of the petitioners, the protectirn against bail under section 37 appties squarery. It is pertinent to note that section 37 of the NDps Act is reproduced below for ready reference: Section il7 - offences to be cogaizable aad ryon-Bailable: \ \ "(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal procedure, lg73 (2 of l974l _ (a) every offence punishable under this Act shall be cognizable; (b) no p.r"on accused of an offence punishable under section 19 or section 24 or section 2TA arrd also for offences involving commercial quantity 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) where the Public prosecutor opposes the application, the Court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of such offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. (2) The limitations on granting of bail specilied in clause (b) of sub-section (l) are in addition to the limitations under the Code of Criminal procedure, \ \ 4 SI\S, J Crl.P.No. 1O199 of 2025 1973 (2 of 19741or any other law for the time being in force, on granting of bail."

8. In the present case, there is no sufficient material at this stage to prima facie establish the innocence of the petitioners. The contraband seized is of commercial quantity, attracting the stringent provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, which restricts the grant of anticipatory bail. Since the investigation is still ongoing and the required conditions under Section 37 are not satisfied, the petitioners are not entitled to bail at this stage.

9. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. 'i ,, sar- N AYA N I ., .r ^ a, r lrr rrt r l lrFt Et A t.Elrl-r AED A[B[+Vt=J[Bt-rgR 6 I ,ffRUE COPY/ SECTION OFFICER To,

1. The Special Sessions judge for the Trial of Cases under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act-cum-t Addl. Sessions J udge at Kothag udem'

2. One CC to Sri. M. PHANINDRA BHARGAV, Advocate [oPUC]. 3. Two CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad IOUTI.

4. Two CD Copies TTS/PSL \ Iil HIGH COURT DATED: 22108t2025 ORDER TAi) cRLP.No.101rr9 0f 2025 C) ?? JA}l 2[28 L. * tv' CRIMINAL PE:TIT|ON lS DISMISSED b