The High Court · 2025

Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANTS Petition under Section 480 & 483 OF BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased tolt is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble court may be pleased to enlarge the Petitioner/Accused No. 1 on Regular Bail in Crime No.'1 1 6 ot 2025 of PS Laxmidevipalli for the alleged offence U/s 8(C) r/w 20(b)(iiXc)' 29 of NDPS Act and pass any such other order or orders as this Hon'ble may be deem fit and proper in the circumstances in the interest of the justice. This Petition comlng on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri T RAHUL ,Advocate for the Petitioner and Sri. Arun Kumar Dodla the Addl. Public Prosecutor (TG) on behalf of the Sole Respondent. The Court made the following: ORDER ./.,/ ORDER: THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.122O8 of 2O2S The present Criminat Petition is fileci prayinr, rhis Court to enlarge the petitioner on bai1, rvho is arral,ed as a<:cusecl No.1 in Crime No. 11(r ,tf 2025 before Laxmidevipalli l,c,lice Station, Bhadradri Kothagudcm Districi, rcqistered frrr the olfences punishable urLder Sections 8(c) rear-i ruith 2(j(b)(ii)(cl, arrd 29 of the Narcotic Drugs ,a.nd Psvchotrcpic Subsranr,es Act, r!:E5, (for short 'I.{DPS] on bail.

2. The brie,I lacl-s of the i:ast: ..re ri-rat on 2l .O6._l()25 at around O9:OO hours, LW- 1 , rvhile on routinc d uty. ar ib jict: Station Laxmidevipalli, received credible ir-rtormatron regarl,ne the illegal possession and ;ransporration of Cry gzrnj zr in ri Bajej Auto (yellolr, with black top), bearing regisrrzrtion nllmi)cr TS29TB54GO, chassis number MD2A97AX5PWK 1O7S5, anri e nEline number BAxwpK241!)7. Tire Vehicle (.riiis reportedly t n route from Bhadrachalarn to Hydcrabad via Kothagude m-yellandu road and expected to arri',,e at Lothuvaaqu viil:rp.r }r:tq'ecn I i:00 ar-rd 12:O0 hours. Actinll on t.he jnforl-ratir:n. LW i follc.trecl rlue orocedure, secured mediatrrrs {LV/s,10 rt I I l, i,tiLtes i.:arn nir:;nbers; (LWs_g & 5--.^\... 2 SKS.J Crl P No 12209 of 2025 \ 9), and staff (LWs-2 to 7), and conducted a covert operation. On the same ciay at 11:20 hours, the petitioner, along with accused No. I were apprehended on BT Road in front of S.R. Function Ha_ll, Lothur.aagu village, Laxmidevipalli Mandal, Bhadradri Kothagudem District.

3. During the confession and seizure panchanama conducted in the presence of mediators, [he accused disclosed that they had procured 67.87O kilograms oi dry ganja valued at Rs.33,93,5O0/- from A-3 and A-4 at Thulasrpaka village, forest area, Chinturu, on

20.06.2025, conccalcd it in the said Bajaj Auto, arrd were transporting ir Lo deiiver [o Accused No.5, Heena, resident of Zaheerabad and nativc o[ Latur, Maharashtra, in exchange for Rs.1.OO,0OO/-. The pohce seized the contraband, one mobile phone, ald the vehiclc from A- I and petitioner under cover of the confession and seizure panchanama. Being aggrieved by implication in rhe case, Criminal Petition is filed.

4. Heard Sri T. Rahul, iearned counsel for petitioner, and Sri D. Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behall of respondent - St.rte. t 3 SKS,.J (:r l'] Nr,. 1 ,208 of 2025

5. lrarned counsel for petitioner submitted that Lhs al,egations leveled against the Petitioner/ Accused No.1 are fair;c. fabricated, and concocted, inrended sole ll, to u,rongfully implic;r te hcr in the present crime. Hc submitted that a plain reading ct' the FIR and the confession-cum-seizure panchanama reveals ,.h at petitioner and Accused No.2 were merely transporters and had no knowledge of the nature of the alleged contraband. He subn Lir ted that the Petitioner was accompanying hcr husband, an :rLr to driver by profession, and her mere presence at [he sa(] rc cilnnot be constmed as culpability under the NDPS Act in th<: a.rscnce of any overt act or specihc intent. He lamented that SeCLion 37 of the NDPS Act is not attracted to the petitioner in the rLsence of any clear evidence of knou,ledge or possession, aird i:er-'tirr,:-, statutory presurnption of culpability cannot be i;'rvoked solely based on her presence. He contended [hat thr: lctltloner is 1n judicial custody since 21.06.2025, he prayed this (:our {. to grant bail to the pel.iti()ner by allorving this criminal petitiorL.

6. On the othcr hand, learned Additional Pr- blic f)rosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learrlccL counsel for petitioner stating that the quantum of recoven oi i:,xtraband constitutes commercial quantity and tha[ the r;c ir ionr:r is likely involved in the illegai activity along with oilr.r- acr.used, He .>r-,1 -' 4 SKS.J Cri.P.No.l2208 of2025 contended that releasing thc petitioner on bail, could lead to her committing similar offences. Therefore, irrayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition. a. This Court, considering submissions made by both the i.'arned counsei and reviewing the material available on record, it is noted that the contention of thc petitioner that the case is false, hctitious, ancl fabricated, thc casc uas registered without following the due procedure. However, rhc Additional Public Prosecutor opposes bail citing commercial rluantiLy' rveighing 67.870 kgs of ganja. At this stage, it is pcrtinerrt irr note Section 37 of the NDPS Act, which reads as under: "37. Oftcnccs to be co-<n:zai;1r: an<l non bailable. - (1) Notwithstanding arrl thing con i:aire<i rn the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 i2 cl l97+),--(a) every offence punishable under this ,\r:t shall be coqnizable; (b) no person accused of an offencc punishable for 1foffences under section 19 or section 24 or section 27A and also for offences invoh'ing commercial quantityl shall be released on bail or- on his oq n bond unless-- (i) the I'irblic Prcsecuior itas oeen gr\/en an opportunity to oppose the application for such release, and (ii) w'here the Public Ptosecuror oPposes the application, the court is satished tha.t there trre teasonable grounds tor bciieving that he is ilot guil[ of such offence and that he is nct likely to commit anvrt-fence uhile on bai[. \ -. *.- 5 SliS J' (lr: j 'i(, I -l lL)rl oi 20 15 (2) Thc limitations on granting of bail specilied in cl rtrse (b) of sub-section {1 ) are in addition to the limrta ir ns under tlre Codeof Criminai Procedure, 1973(2of 19i ij or an]'other iaw for the trme being rn lbrce on gra lils oi bail."

8. In view thereof, Section 37 of the NDPS Act n.andales that offences involving commercial quantities be non-bailab e, rcquiring reasonzrble grounds to believe the accused is nr:t guiitY and unlikely to commit further offences while on bail Grven the serious allegations against the petitioncr, this Court i: ;ior satisfled that conditions for granting baii undcr Secrion .] , irr-,: nc.t. Th<:reforc, the criminal petition lacks merit and th. s:rrrie is liabje t,: be dismissed. 9 Accordingly. this Criminal Petition is dismjsseri Miscellaneous applications, if any pcnding sha-l stand cioscd To, SD/. <.BHAVANI SWAMY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR IITRT.IE COPY// ,€ SECTION OFFICER 1 The I ADJ Bhadradri Kothagudem, Bhadradardi Kothagrdem Diskict 2. The lll Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Kothagudem, Kothagudem District.

3. The SHO Laxmide\ : :ff:: " "_, c Se CGto SRl. PUI f,'. Two cD copies PK/PSL \q- ,;:il:"*il::?jJil"dri Kothasudem District BLI. PRosECUToR Advocate loNttst dtuD / \ l I HIGH COURT l ) DATED:2610912025 ORDER DISMISSED CRLP.No.12208 ot 2025 .a=a==' I J;:rrlE s i.1r;. 15 t.it\j ?{lr q' ) o (J 1- -.- r-r,rf..-t1 6\ uot(d k*