The High Court · 2025

1. State of Telangana,, Represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad -.RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANTS Petition under Section 480 & 483 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the [\/emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the Petitioner/Accused No.2 on Bail pending investigation of Crime. No. 75 of 2025 on the file Prohibition & Excise P.S. Dhoolpet, 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 D. Arun Kumar Additional Public Prosecutor (TG) on behalf of the Sole Respondent. The Court made the following: ORDER ,----=:= THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJI NA CRIMINAL PETITI oN No.11863 OF 2Oi;l ORDER: This crjinrnal petitron is filecl under Secliol-t ! Rharatit,a Nag:irik Suraksha Sanhita, 2O23 (lor shr r Lhc petitioncr/A.2 seeking enlargement on bail ir 'ii'ith Crime No.75 of 2023 of Prohibition & E> c Dhoolpet, Hvricrabud. The oflences allegerJ petitioner arc undcr Section 8(c) r/u' 20(b)(ri ( Narcotic Drutgs .rnd Psychotropic Suilstzrncr:s "\: 0 &, '1E3 of 'BNSS') bv r:onnectiot-t sc Sta lion, g:tir st fl ie l)&22{c) of , 1985 (h rr short 'NDPS Acr').

2. reiiable information about posscssion and trars The case ol rhe prosecution is that on 1108 2O25 ot't rort:rtion ol NIDMA, dr5' girnla lly some persons the police cor r ucLcd check at Jali Harlulnlln Temple, Dhoolpet, Hyderabad' f Ar:t i,,,a DI-X and petitioner along with A 3 on Bl I ,und A. L olr lman Strcet vehiclr: and serizecl 1 .5 1 0 Kgs of Ganja, 0 1 1 grarn s of l,SD .le11r' (5) clots artcl 12 29O grams of MDMA from he m. The conLraband u'as seized from the possession of A the covcr of panchanama in thc presence of palr' police have rccorded the crinfession statemenLs I rr,hercir-r thc invoh.'emcnt of other accused came :o A.3 uncler has and the ' A. 1 to A.3, r o light. As 2 such police registcred the case against the accuscd for the abovc offence s.

3. Heard Sri Gulab Singh, learned counsel lor the pctitioncr and Sri D.Arun Kumar, learned Aclditional Public Prosecutor trppcaring for the respondent Statc.

4. The contention of learned counsel for the petrtioner is that petitioncr is innocent of the said olfcnces :rncl he has been falscly implicated in this case by thc police. Petitioner is in jail fronr 1 1.08.2025, and he is the onl1, breacl u inncr ol the [atnih' and }-re has lo take care of his old aged parcnts suflcring from ill hcalth. He further contended that petitioner ultdertakcs tc) zrbide by eLny conditions that may bc irnposecl b1, this Court arnd pravecl to grant bail to him.

5. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposcci bail on the ground that 1.510 kgs of ganja, O. 1 1 grams of LSD jelly (5) dots and 12.290 grams ol MDMA ,,r,as scized frorn the possession of petitioner along wilh A. 1 and A.2 the LSD .Ielly and the MDMA is a huge commercial quantitl. anrl invcstigation is still pending. Hou,cver, no criminal cases arc pencling against this petitioner- As Lhe contlaband seized is a hLrge commcrcial quantily, he praycd to dismiss this pctil ion. I I 3

6. Consiclerring the submissions made by 'l . respectir.'e counsel and the marterizrl placed on record, the pe -: ioner hcrcin is A.2 i.::'rcl sr:izerl contrabarnd is 1-510 kgs ol : L,ria, 12.29O qr'r-rrns oi MD MA :rL.rd [). L I grams ol LSD Jcllv : ) dots. T]'re :rllcged t:onti-abanc.i of fuIDMA is a commercial qui r tity. At this s',irge, il is per(in€rnL to lloLc Scction 37 o[ the NDPS ,\ct, :rnd the s:rmc reads as ttndcr : "37. OiLrrccs Lo bc cognizable and non baiLal L . l1) Nol\\ithslanding anrthing contained in t1 l Codc ol Crirnirral Procedure, 1973 12 ol 197+ , la) everl offence punishable under lhis Act si i' I be cogniztrble; It)l no pcrson at:t--used of an offence pnnisha r : 1or l[ofiences under section 19 or section 2.+ ( r si'crion 27A and also lor oflences in\.olv r l corrmcrcial quantitl,l shall be released on Li. I or or-r lrrs oun bond unless-' 1i) the l'ul)iic I'rosccutor has been given a r opr)ortuuitv to oppose the application for s;r c r r-elease. ancl iiil ri hcre f he l'ublic I'rosecutor opposes ,l -' al)plicarion, the corrrt is satisfied that there rr r rcasonablc grour-rds lor belicving that he is n, t guiltr o[ suc]r o[ti:n<:c and that he is not likel-r r cornmit any offcnce while on bail- (2) 'l'he limitations on granting of bail specif e I in clerr-Lse (b) of srrb-section (1) are in addition r L1.re lirnitatrons Lrnder the Code of Crimi r I Pr-ocedure, 1973 \2 of 1971) or an1, other law fi r lhe rinre being in force on granting of bail." 1

7. In vieu' thereof, Section 37 of the NDPS Act mandates thar offcnces involving commercial quar-rtities be non-bailable , requiring rcasonable grounds to believe that the accused is not guiltv ar-rd unlikely to commit furthcr offences u,hile on bail_ In thc thcts and circumstances of the case on hancl, this Court is not satisfied that conditions for granting bail under Section 37 are met. Thcrefore, the Criminal Petition lacks merit and the same is liable to be dismissed.

8. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is dismisscd Misccllaneous petitions, if any, pending sh:LIl stancl closed SD/- A PRATHIMA DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To,

1. The I Addl. Sessions Judge, Hyderabad. 2. The SHO Prohibition & Excise Stationm Dhoolpet, Hyderabad 3. One CC to SRl. GULAB SINGH Advocate [OPUC] 4. One CGto SRL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR Advocate [OUT] -fino

6. Two CD Copies ABK Vr _:. ;ffi 1 a \, "i:, i I i i I i I I I I I I I I I I I HIGH COURT DATED:2510912025 oRDBK DISMISSED CRLP.No.11863 ot 2025 a() ."da $sr