The High Court · 2025

Petition under Section 480 & 483 of B.N.S.S. praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarged the Petitioner/Accused No. 1 on bail in Cr. No. 136 of 2025 on the file of the lst Additional Session Judge (Special Court for cases under NDPS Act), at Kothagudem in the above stated circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri P Srujan ,Advocate for the Petitioner and Sri D. Arun Kumar, the Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Sole Respondent. The Court made the following: ORDER 7F) THE HONOURABLE SMT' JUSTICE K' SUJr 'NA CRIMINAL PETITION No.14479 of 2O2r ORDER: Thrs Criminal Petition is filed seeking tt t Court 1o enlarge thc pctitioner, on bail, who is arrayed as a - :ust'rl No 1 in Crimr: No.136 of 2025 of E/ Bayyaram Poli' c Statiotr' Bhadradri Kothagudem District. Tho bricf lacts of the case are that the cas(' 1 r-'rtained to 2. t1're atlcged illegai possession and transportatiorl rl 5{) kg of dn' Ganja by accused persons on 28-() i'2O25 aL Penlannagudcm X-Roads, within the limits of trduila B:,rlyaram I)<tlice Station- Based on prior inf'r- la'ti'rn' trc police intcrccpted three cars and a motorcycle ar r r:rla imed to have scizccl L8 packets ofGanja from the vehicles

3. Heard Sri P. Srujan, learned counsel a1 peirring on behalf ol thc pctitioner as rvell as Sri D' Arun Kur Lltr' learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on b I rrrlf of the respondent - State. Learned counsel for the petitioner submi ' rd t hat the 4. petitioner \ ras merely a cab driver who had joinct ''he trip for 2 SKS,J Crl.P.No.14479 of 2O25 additional income and had no conscious knowledge or intention to transport any contraband and that the police, despite having prior information, failed to comply with mandatory requirements under Section 42 of the NDPS Act, thereby vitiating the search and seizure. He further submitted that the name of the petitioner was not initially mentioned and that his implication was solely based on inadmissible confessional statements of co-accused. He contended that the quantity allegedly found in each vehicle did not qualify as commercial quantity, that the petitioner had no criminal antecedents. Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant bail to the petitioner by allowing this criminal petition.

5. On thc other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner stating that the petitioner is a drug peddler. He further submitted that the investigation is in progress and if the petitioner is released on bail, at lhis stage, he may tamper with the evidence and may threaten the witnesses. Hence, he prayed the Court to dismiss the criminai petition.

6. This Court, considering submissions made by both the learned counsel and reviewing the material available on ' .-,.jt-,{r ( 3 SKS'J Crl.P .l o.14479 of 2O2S rccord, it is notcd that the contention of the petitj( ner that t-he casc is falsc, lictitious, and fabricated, the case v'' s rcgistercd l'ithotrt lbllos ing the due procedurc Hou'ever, the learned Additional I)utrlic Prosecutor opposes bail citin'3 r:ommer<:ial qu;rntitv ut ighing .50 kg of ganja. At this stage, t is pertinent lo note Se('tr()n 37 of the NDPS Act, rvhich reads rl ; under: ".17. Offcnccs to be cognizable and non bai: rle. (l) N ot\(,it hstanding anYthing contained itL the (lrrric of (lriminal I'rocedure, 1973 12 of 1974, \al clcr v olft:nct: pur-tishable under this Act shr I bc corllriz;rirlc; (l)) no pcrson accused of an olfence punishab| ior lL()llences under section 19 or section 24 or str -ion 2 ,'A and also for offences involving comrn: cial (luanlit-\l shall be relcasecl on bail or on his ltn llrr r d tttrltss (il thc Publrc ol)l)ortunitl to lrL'irst', a rttl Prosecutor oppose the has been giverr an application foI uch {i ) rr helc thc Public Prosecutor opposes ;rpplic:ation, the court is satisfied that thele r<'asonablc grounds for betieving that he i; gLriltl of such offence and that he is not likl cornmit any offence while on bail. (2) 'lhe limitations on granting of bail specif t I in cliruse {b} of sub section (1) are in addition .< -he limitatfuns under the Code of Criminal Proctr ure, 1r 4 sKs,J Crl-P.Ito.144?9 of 2O2S 1973 (2 of 19741 or any other law for the time being in force on granting of bail."

7. In view thereof, Section 37 of the NDpS Act mandates that offences involving commercial quantities be non_bailable, requiring reasonable grounds to believe the accused is not guilty and unlikely to commit further offences while on bail. Given the serious allegations against the petitioner, this Court is not satisfied that conditions for granting bail under Section 37 are met. Therefore, the criminal petition lacks merit and the same is iiable to be dismissed.

8. Accordingly, this Criminal petition is dismissed Miscellaneous applications, if any pencling, shall stand closed Sd/- N. SRIHARI DEPUW REGIST //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To

1. The lst Additional Session Judge (Special Court for cases under NDPS

2. The Station House Officer, E/Bayyaram Police Station, Bhadradri Act), at Kothagudem Kothagudem District.

3. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad.(OUT)

4. One CC to Sri P Srujan, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CD Copies Sa/S a \(,- d HIGH COURT DATED:21 11112025 ORDER CRLP.No.14479 of 2025 . a::="':--- - - -,.i,- qr . <_) i i JiN ?0i0 l') '.\- * . :sp,irc,t DISMISSING THE CRIMINAL PETITION % ,Ca \({- 6d/