The High Court · 2025

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the lvlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri K Venkateswar Rao ,Advocate for the Petitioner and Of the Additional Public Prosecutor i.e. Arun Kumar Dodla for the State of Telangana on behalf of the Respondent The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. I; IJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.10786 of 12 t25 ORDER: Seeking the Court to enlarge the petit tner, who is arrayed as accused No. I in Crime No.39 t) of 2024 of Humayun Nagar Police Station, Hyderabad. on bail, the present Criminal Petition is filed.

2. The brief facts of the case are that on 21 1O.2O24, the HumaJrun Nagar Police seized the contraband ir , the accused persons are buying and selling the contraba I 1 by illegally transporting to the general public in order to I rrn money in an ease mannerand also registered a case uide '.rime No.398 of 2024 before the Humayun Nagar Police, Hyd,: abad, for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) read t.th 22(C), 27 and, 29of the NDPS Act.

3. Heard Sri K. Venkateshwar Rao, lear ted counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as Sri D. Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor i ppearing for respondent - State. I ) l I I !-- \ -- *",! 2 sKfi,J crl.P.Ito.lO7E6 of 2025

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he is no way concerned with the alleged offences and that though there is no corroborative evidence, the petitioner was implicated in the case with false and fabricated allegations. He further submitted that all the material witnesses were examined, and further detention of the petitioner is unnecessary and that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 25.10.2O24, causing undue hardship to his family. Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant bail to the petitioner by allowing 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 seized contraband i.e., 5O grams of MDMA is commercial quantity and also the investigation is not completed, therefore, granting bail to the petitioner, at this stage, does not arise. Hence, he prayed the Court to dismiss the criminaI petition.

6. This Court, considering submissions made by both the parties and reviewing the material available on record, it is noted that the contention of the petitioner that the case is false, hctitious, and fabricated, the case was registered without following the due procedure. However, the learned 3 SKS,J Crl-P.Ik 107A6 of 2025 Additional Public Prosecutor opposes bail cil i I 4 that the seized contraband is commercial quantity. At this stage, it is pertinent to note Section 37 of the NDPS Act, wtri :h reads as under: "37. Offences to be cognizable and non-baili -- (l ) Not\4,ithstanding anything contained ir.r Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 ot l97a). every offence punishable under this Act shal cogn izable, lle. a) (b) no person accused of an offence punishabl or 1[otfences under section 19 or section 24 or st:rt rn 27A and also for offences involving comme ( al quantityl shall be released on bail or on his I rn bond unless- (i) the Pubhc opportunity to release, ald Prosec u tor oppose the has been given tn application for st --h (ii) where the Public Prosecutor opposes 1e application, the court is satisfied that there re reasonable grounds for believing that he is ot guilty of such offence and that he is not likr:l" to commit any offence while on bail. (2) The limitations on granting of bail specifie,l in ctause (b) of sub-section (1) are in addition to re limitations under the Code of Criminal Procerl r e, 1973 (2 of 197 4) or any other law for the timc b | 1g in force on granting of bail." 7 . In vie'*, thereof, Section 37 of the NDPS A -- mandal.es that offences involving commercial quantities be rr,n-bailable, t I ) 4 sKs,J Crl.P.Ilo.lO7E6 of 2025 requiring reasonable grounds to believe the accused is not guilty and unlikely to commit further offences while on bail. Hence, since the allegations levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature and there are no changed circumsLances in the case, this Court is not satished t]lat conditions for granting bail under Section 37 are met. Therefore, the criminal petition iacks merit and the same is liable to be dismissed.

8. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is dismissed Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed SD/. C. DEEPIKA STANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// ECTION OFFICER To, (our)

1. The Vl Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, at Hyderabad. 2. The Police Station, Humayunagar, Hyderabad. 3. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Telangana, Hyderabad

4. One CC to SRI K VENKATESWAR RAO Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CD Copies AS/SA HIGH COURT DATED:0810912025 I I ORDER CRLP.No.10786 ot 2025 "i i'.f- ,_,, .i.c.. 18 ttl 21Ui ], ri a,! CRIMINAL PETITION DISMISSED g I