Miscelianeous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed //TRUE COPY// Sd/ v. KAVITHA EPUTY REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER I To

2. Rohit Godaji Chavhan S/o. Godaji Gopinath Chavhan, Aged: 35 years, Occ: Labour in Dairy Form at Ashoknagar, R/o. Ashok Nagar, Nigpani Wadgoan, Srirampur Tq & Police Station, Ahmad Nagar District, [\ilaharashtra State.

3. Rajani Rohit Chavan Wo. Rohit Godaji Chavan, Age:28 Years, Occ:labour in Dairy Form at Ashoknagar, Ri/o. Ashok Nagar, Nigpani Wadgoan, Srirampur Tq & Folice Station, Ahmad Nagar District, Maharashtra State. 4- Padma AShok Pimpala Wo. Ashok Adhar Pimpale, Age:44 years, Occ: Housewife, Rl/o.'Ashok Nagar; Nigpani Wadgoan, Srirampur Tq & Police Station, Ahmad Nagar District, [Vlaharashtra State. ...Petitioners/ Accused No.1 to 4. AND The State of Telangana Through The Station House Officer, Railway Police Station Secunderabad, Re:by Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad. . ..Respondent Petition under Section 480 and 483 of 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 on bail in connection with Cr.No.355 of 2025 on the file of Railway Police Station, Secunderabad. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri B.Muralidhar, Advocate for the Petitioners and the Sri D.Arun Kumar, Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent. The Court made the following: ORDER ') ORDER: THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SU.JANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.11297 of 211'.1,5 This Criminal Petition is filed for grant t:. bail to the petitioners who are arrayed as accused Nos. 1 1 r 4 in Crime No.355/2025 on the file of the Railway F rlice Station, Secunderabad, registered for the offences pul-rishable under Sections 8(c) read with 20(b)(ii)(c) of NDPS Act.

2. The brief facts of the case are that on O4.OT ) )'25' LW I and his team conducted a generai checking at Secundr:rabad railway station and found petitioners in suspicious circr::nstances with four bags containing 2 1 bundles of ganja, eac:I $/retDpcd u'ith brown adhesive plaster. Upon enquiry, the petitic'r-r;-s stated that they had purchased the ganja from A5 and A6 at Bi:rhampur area and were transporting it to Aurangabad. The tol.a. il'eight of the seized ganja was 45.860 kgs, along with four nrcbile phones. A case was registered under Section 8(c) r/w 2o(b)(i0 I)) of the NDPS Act, .1nd the petitioners were remanded to judic al custody on July 4,2025. 2 3- Heard B.Murlidhar, learned counsel for petitioner, ald Sri D. Arun Kumar, learned Additional Pubiic Prosecutor appearing for respondent State..

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners denies all allegations and claim false implication, having committed no offence. He further submitted that with no connection to the alleged offence, the petitioners were remanded, causing harm to their reputation. Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant bail to the petitioners by allowing this criminal petition.

5. On the other hand, learned Additional Pgblic Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners stating that the allegations leveled against the petitioners are serious in nature. He further submitted that the commercial quantity of ganja is involved in this case. Therefore, while advocating that the matter requires investigation, he prayed the Court to disrniss the criminal petition.

6. Having regard to the rival submissions made and on going through the material placed on record, it is noted that the contention of learned counsel for petitioners is that the case against the petitioners is false and fictitious, whereas, the learned I &l . .,t',;::/ 3 Additional Public Prosecutor opposes the petiticr' citing that commercial quantity of ganja was seized in the c;'Ll;r:' That being so, at this stage, il is pertinent to note Section 37 r-r1 the NDPS Act' which reads as under: "37. Offences to be cognizable and non-bailabl: (1) Notu'ithstanding anything contained in the rlode of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 ol 197a1, -lal cverr ol]ence punlshable under this Act shall be cognizable; (1r) r-ro person accused of an offence punislLalrle for 1[offcnces under section 19 or section 24 or se( -ilrr 27A and also lor offences invotving commercial (lr':rrltit) ] shall be released on bail or on his own bond unl:s' (i) the Public Prosecutor has been given an op.()rtunity to oppose the apptication for such release, and (ii) where the Public Prosecutor opposes the application, the court is satisfred ttrat there are reasonable 61:ounds for believing that he is not guilty of such offence a rd that he is not likely to commit arry offence while on ba (2) The limitations on granting of bail specifred 'ti clause {b) of sub-section (1) are in addition to the lirr -alions under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 oi l97 4l or any other law for the time being in force on llranting of bail." ( I

7. From the above extracted portion, it is clea: Lhat Section 37 of the NDPS Act mandates that offences invo lvr ng commercial t ; I B 4 i1 quantities be non-bailable, requiring reasonable grounds to believe the accused is not guilty and unlikely to commit further offences while on barl. Given the serious allegations against the petitioners, this Court is not satisf,red that conditions for granting bail under Section 37 are met.

8. In lighc of the above discussion, this Court is of the opinion that there are no merits in this criminal petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.

9. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is dismissed Miscelianeous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed //TRUE COPY// Sd/. V. KAVITHA EPUTY REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER I To,

1. The Judicial lvlagistrate of the 2. The Station House Officer, RP Station, GRP-Secunderabad. First Class for Rail S-Secunderabad(G ys t Secunderabad euncerabad0 police

3. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUTI

4. One CC to Sri B.Murlidhar, Advocate TOPUCI 5. Two CD Copies NVB/kam M i I HIGH COURT DATED:1 610912025 ORDER GRLP.No.11297 ot 2025 1 l',,, \ \ t. -'t:,- j, ':.,:. l, g 5iP 20n 't' DISMISSING THE CRIMINAL PETITION \

2. Rohit Godaji Chavhan S/o. Godaji Gopinath Chavhan, Aged: 35 years, Occ: Labour in Dairy Form at Ashoknagar, R/o. Ashok Nagar, Nigpani Wadgoan, Srirampur Tq & Police Station, Ahmad Nagar District, [\ilaharashtra State.

3. Rajani Rohit Chavan Wo. Rohit Godaji Chavan, Age:28 Years, Occ:labour in Dairy Form at Ashoknagar, Ri/o. Ashok Nagar, Nigpani Wadgoan, Srirampur Tq & Folice Station, Ahmad Nagar District, Maharashtra State. 4- Padma AShok Pimpala Wo. Ashok Adhar Pimpale, Age:44 years, Occ: Housewife, Rl/o.'Ashok Nagar; Nigpani Wadgoan, Srirampur Tq & Police Station, Ahmad Nagar District, [Vlaharashtra State. ...Petitioners/ Accused No.1 to 4. AND The State of Telangana Through The Station House Officer, Railway Police Station Secunderabad, Re:by Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad. . ..Respondent Petition under Section 480 and 483 of 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 on bail in connection with Cr.No.355 of 2025 on the file of Railway Police Station, Secunderabad. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri B.Muralidhar, Advocate for the Petitioners and the Sri D.Arun Kumar, Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent. The Court made the following: ORDER ') ORDER: THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SU.JANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.11297 of 211'.1,5 This Criminal Petition is filed for grant t:. bail to the petitioners who are arrayed as accused Nos. 1 1 r 4 in Crime No.355/2025 on the file of the Railway F rlice Station, Secunderabad, registered for the offences pul-rishable under Sections 8(c) read with 20(b)(ii)(c) of NDPS Act.

2. The brief facts of the case are that on O4.OT ) )'25' LW I and his team conducted a generai checking at Secundr:rabad railway station and found petitioners in suspicious circr::nstances with four bags containing 2 1 bundles of ganja, eac:I $/retDpcd u'ith brown adhesive plaster. Upon enquiry, the petitic'r-r;-s stated that they had purchased the ganja from A5 and A6 at Bi:rhampur area and were transporting it to Aurangabad. The tol.a. il'eight of the seized ganja was 45.860 kgs, along with four nrcbile phones. A case was registered under Section 8(c) r/w 2o(b)(i0 I)) of the NDPS Act, .1nd the petitioners were remanded to judic al custody on July 4,2025. 2 3- Heard B.Murlidhar, learned counsel for petitioner, ald Sri D. Arun Kumar, learned Additional Pubiic Prosecutor appearing for respondent State..

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners denies all allegations and claim false implication, having committed no offence. He further submitted that with no connection to the alleged offence, the petitioners were remanded, causing harm to their reputation. Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant bail to the petitioners by allowing this criminal petition.

5. On the other hand, learned Additional Pgblic Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners stating that the allegations leveled against the petitioners are serious in nature. He further submitted that the commercial quantity of ganja is involved in this case. Therefore, while advocating that the matter requires investigation, he prayed the Court to disrniss the criminal petition.

6. Having regard to the rival submissions made and on going through the material placed on record, it is noted that the contention of learned counsel for petitioners is that the case against the petitioners is false and fictitious, whereas, the learned I &l . .,t',;::/ 3 Additional Public Prosecutor opposes the petiticr' citing that commercial quantity of ganja was seized in the c;'Ll;r:' That being so, at this stage, il is pertinent to note Section 37 r-r1 the NDPS Act' which reads as under: "37. Offences to be cognizable and non-bailabl: (1) Notu'ithstanding anything contained in the rlode of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 ol 197a1, -lal cverr ol]ence punlshable under this Act shall be cognizable; (1r) r-ro person accused of an offence punislLalrle for 1[offcnces under section 19 or section 24 or se( -ilrr 27A and also lor offences invotving commercial (lr':rrltit) ] shall be released on bail or on his own bond unl:s' (i) the Public Prosecutor has been given an op.()rtunity to oppose the apptication for such release, and (ii) where the Public Prosecutor opposes the application, the court is satisfred ttrat there are reasonable 61:ounds for believing that he is not guilty of such offence a rd that he is not likely to commit arry offence while on ba (2) The limitations on granting of bail specifred 'ti clause {b) of sub-section (1) are in addition to the lirr -alions under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 oi l97 4l or any other law for the time being in force on llranting of bail." ( I

7. From the above extracted portion, it is clea: Lhat Section 37 of the NDPS Act mandates that offences invo lvr ng commercial t ; I B 4 i1 quantities be non-bailable, requiring reasonable grounds to believe the accused is not guilty and unlikely to commit further offences while on barl. Given the serious allegations against the petitioners, this Court is not satisf,red that conditions for granting bail under Section 37 are met.

8. In lighc of the above discussion, this Court is of the opinion that there are no merits in this criminal petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.

9. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is dismissed Miscelianeous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed //TRUE COPY// Sd/. V. KAVITHA EPUTY REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER I To,

1. The Judicial lvlagistrate of the 2. The Station House Officer, RP Station, GRP-Secunderabad. First Class for Rail S-Secunderabad(G ys t Secunderabad euncerabad0 police

3. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUTI

4. One CC to Sri B.Murlidhar, Advocate TOPUCI 5. Two CD Copies NVB/kam M i I HIGH COURT DATED:1 610912025 ORDER GRLP.No.11297 ot 2025 1 l',,, \ \ t. -'t:,- j, ':.,:. l, g 5iP 20n 't' DISMISSING THE CRIMINAL PETITION \