c_ \ `Lk\``` WEDNESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF APRIL, TWOTHOUSANDANDTWENTY FIVE , :PRESENT: HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T MALL[KARJUNA RAO ~ CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3521 OF 2025 Betwee n : Muhammed Nadirsha P, S/o. Moideen Kutty, aged about 27 years, R/o. Parambil Manadth House, Chinakkal, Mooniyur South, Malappuram District, Kerala State. . I |Petitioner/Accused AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. ...Respondent ., Petition under Section 439(1 ) of Cr.P.C and Section 483(1 ) of BNSS, 2023 is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the memorandum of grounds of criminal petition, the High Court may be pleased to modify the order passed by the Metropolitan Sessions Judge-cum-I Addl. District and Sessions Judge -Special Judge for Trial of Offences under NDPS Act, Visakhapatnam in Crl.M.P.No.3283/2024 in Cr.No.411/2024 dated 24.01.2025 by considering the situation of the Petitioner/Accused as 'lpetitioner/Accused to be released on bail on executing a self bond for Rs. .`., ,-.-I I 10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand only) with single surety for a like sum tO the satisfaction of Hon'ble Metropolitan Sessions Judge-Gum-I Addl. District and sessions Judge -Special Judge for Trial of Offences under NDPS Act, visakhapatnam instead of petitioner/Accused to be released on bail on executing a self bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of Hon'ble VI Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class for Railways, Visakhapatnam and permit the petitioner/Accused to deposit the surety bond amount Of Rs.10,000/- with single surety instead of Rs.50,000/-with two sureties; The petition com-lng on for hearing, upon Perusing the Petition and memorandum of grounds of criminal petition and upon hearing the arguments of sri Gollapalli Maheswara Rao, Advocate for the Petitioner and public prosecutor for the Respondent, the Court made the following; This Criminal Petition under Section 483(1) of B.N.S.S., has been filed by the petitioner/Accused, seeking modification of the COnditiOnS in the bail orders vide crl.M.P.No.3283/2024 dated 24.01.2025 on the file of the learned I Additional District & Sessions Judge-Gum-Special Judge for trial of offences under NDPS Act, Visakhapatnam and permit the Petitioner tO execute Self bond for an amount of Rs.1 O,000/-with one surety instead of Rs.50,000/-with two sureties. ±/ ®o, \` a,, -``,t 2 TMR,J Crl.P.3521 2025 I. 2. A case in Crime No.411/2024 of Government Railway Police Station, was registered against the petitioner for the offence punishable under sections 20(b(ii)(B),25 r/w 8(c) of NDPS Act, 1985. 3. Without going into the merits Of the Case, this Criminal Petition iS filed only seekI'ng modification Of conditions in the bail orders in crl.M.P.No.3283/2024 dated 24.01.2025 on the file of learned I Additional District & Sessions Judge-Gum-Special Judge for trial of offences under NDPS Act, Visakhapatnam. 4. lt is submitted that despite grant Of bail by the I Additional District & sessions Judge-Gum-Special Judge for trial Of OffenCeS under NDPS Act, visakhapatnam in crI.M.P.No.3283/2024 dated 24.01.2025, petitioner/accused could not furnish two sureties for Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned VI Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class for Railways, Visakhapatnam. He further COntendS that the Petitioner belongs to a poor family and he is the only person to look after his family members by doing coolie work. lt is further submitted that more than two months time elapsed after granting bail to the petitioner and the PetitiOner'S family members could not comply with the order by furnishing sureties. ln the said facts of the case, petitioner requests to consider his case on humanitarian grounds. 5. Learned counsel relied on a decision reported in SMWP (Criminal) No.4/2021 dated 31.01.2O23 on the file O±tb£ Hon'ble Supreme Court wherein v-p \` \, i=[= a.I-i 3 TMR,J crl.p.3521 2025 it 'ls observed that l¢if the bail borlds are not furnished Within One month from the date of grant bail, the concerned Court may SUO-mOtu take uP the Case and consider whether the conditions of bail require modification/relaxation". 6. lt seems that the Court who granted bail tO the Petitioner in this Crime has not taken such steps, thereby forced the petit'loner to approach this Court. There is nothing On record tO Show that the Said SubmiSSiOnS are incorrect, aS such, this court is inclined to modify the bail order. 7. ln the result, the Criminal Petition iS allowed and the Petitioner iS Ordered to be released on bail On h'lS executing a Self bond for Rs.10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand only) with one two surety for like sum. lt iS hereby made Clear that the release of the petitioner/accused on execution of self bond for Rs.5O,000/-(Rupees fifty thousand Only) With two Sureties for like Sum each iS only modified. The remaining conditions imposed aga'lnSt the ._,_^^, .^^rl ehall rema-ln unaltered. Sd/- V.Savitri Gowri ASSISTANTfu REGISTRAR lilt I /ITRUE COPY// -,.` sEi=iE SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Metropolitan Sessions Judge-cum-I AddI District & Sessions Judge-SpecI-al Judge for Trial of offences under NDPS Act, VI'Sakhapatnam. 2. The VI Addl Judicial Magistrate of FI-rSt class for Railways, Visakhapatnam 3. The Station House officer, Govt RaI-lWay PoII®Ce Station, Visakhapantam cI®ty, VI'SakhaPatnam 4. The Superintendent, central JaI'l, Visakhapatnam. 5. One CC to Sri. Gollapalli Maheswara Rao, Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court of AfP [OUT] 7 rna er`arJa I-^nu HIGH COURT TMR,J DATED:09/04/2025 ORDER CRLP.No.3521 of 2025 ALLOWED