lN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMAR WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE :PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T MALLIKARJUNA R CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3429 OF 2025 / Betwee n : 1. Kuncham Sai Ganesh, S/o. Koncham Venkateswarlu, aged about 19 years R/o. Thallagedda, Suryapet City, Suryapet District, Telangana State. 2. Bushigampala Bharat Kumar, S/o. B. Upendra, aged about 22 years, R/o. Dasaigudem Village, Suryapet District, Telangana State. ...petitioners/Accused No.1, 2 AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. ...Respondent Petition under Section 480 & 483 of BNSS (old Section 437 and 439 of cr.p.c.) is filed praying that in the circumstances stated jn the memorandum of grounds filed in support of the Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the Petitioners/Accused No.1, 2 on bail pending disposal of Crime No.95/2025 of Railway Police Station, Visakhapatnam. The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the memorandum of grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of SRI ADAPA SUDHAKAR RAO Advocate for the Petitioners, and of PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent, and the Court made the following ORDER: APHCO10162272025 IN THE Hl6H COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATl (Special origjna[ Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T MALLIKARJUNA RAO Between: £BLMINAL PETITION NO: 3429/2025 [3369] I Kuncham sai Ganesh and others .UPETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND The State Of Andhra pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the petitioner/accused(s): 1.ADAPA SUDHAKAR RAO Counsel for the Respondent/complal'nant: 1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER.I This Criminal Petition u/sec.480 and 483 of B.N.S.S. has been filed by the petitioners/Al and A2 seeking regular bail in Cr.No.95/2025 of VIsakhapatnam GRP Vijayawada. 2. The above said crime was registered against the petitioners and others for the offence punishable u/see.8(c) I/w 20(b)(I'i)(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and psychotropic substances Act, 1985 (for short fthe NDPS Act'). 3. The case of the prosecution isasfollows.a on 10.3.2025 in between ll.50 am and 1.30 pm, on receipt of credl'ble information about illegal possession and transportatI|On Of ganja, I= |_./' <u the s.I of police, GRP Vis-'akhapatnam along with his Staff and mediators conducted checking outside platform no.1 and found two persons in suspicious circumstances. on enquiry, they disclosed the'lr identity particulars as that of Al and A2 and police found 17 kgs of ganja in their possession. Then police arrested the accused, seized the contraband and sent the accused to court for judicial remand. They confessed the involvement of A3 and A4 in commission of the offence. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that even according tO the case of the prosecution, the petitioners were arrested when they Were found in possession of 17 kgs of ganja and the petitioners have been languishing in jail from 10.3.2025 and prays to allow the criminal petition. 5. On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor confirms non-f|lling of charge sheet by the police and opposed for grant of bail to the petitioners. But fairly conceded that the contraband seized is below commercial quantity. He further submitted that the petitioners have nO previous antecedents. 6. Heard both sides. 7. Perused the entire material on record. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the contraband alleged to be seized from the possession of accused is only 17 kgs Which is not commercial quantity. The petitioners were in judicial Custody from 10.3.2025 and they had permanent abode. As the contraband Seized iS not commercial quantity, no reasons need to be recorded as contemplated under section 37 of the NDPS Act. Most of the wltnesses are shown to be offl-cI-al witnesses and the release of the accused would not cause hampering of ,'nvestigatjon. As most of the investI'gation might have been completed and the petitioners had permanent abode and there is no possibjll'ty of their fleeing away from J'uStI'Ce, as such, this court is I-nclined to grant bail to the petitioners. ll. ln the result, the crjml|nal petition is allowed with the following conditions: i. The petitl'oners/Al and A2 hereI'n Shall be released on ba" on the,'r executing a personal bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) each with two (o2) sureties for a like sum each to the satisfactl'on of the learned I Additional Distrl'ct and sessions Judge, visakhapatnam,- ii) After release, the petitl'oners sha" attend before the station House offI'Cer COnCerned once l'n a fortnight between 10.00am to o1.00pm for a Period Of three (03) months,I and iii) that the petitioners are directed not to hamper the investigation and tamper with the prosecutl'on w,'tnesses. _-. I I ASsISTiirti+ S<P±+a. ` F_ RA S'A a :C>J®-_ _ ISTRAR /ITRUE COPY// SEc Fc _ ___- 'T -- To'1. The StatlOn House Officer, Ra'IIWay PolICe Station, VisakhaPatnam. 2. The I Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Special Judge for Trial of offences under NDPS act, VisakhaPatnam. 3. The Superintendent, Central Jail, V'lsakhaPatnam. 4. One CC to SRl. ADAPA SUDHAKAR RAO, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCs tO PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court Of Andhra PradeSh. [OUT] 6. One spare COPY KN i HIGH couRT TMR,J DA TED .. 1 6/o4/2025 ORDER CRLP.No.3429 of 2025 ALLOWED