lN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATIJ.SedRE; MONDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWOTHOUSANDANDTWENTYFIVE # :PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T MALLIKARJUNA RAO `';`?,+.rf, CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4310 OF2025 ~ Between : Konduri Manikanta @ pandu, @ pandu, s/o subba Raju, aged about 26 yrs, Hindu, R/0 D.No-16-159, Subbulamma Vari Street, Santh Nagar, Penamaluru Mandal, Vijayawada, NTR District. PetitI-Oner/AI AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by llts public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh At Amaravati. Respondent/complainant rf Petition under sectI'OnS 480 & 483 of BNSS (Old Sections 437 & 439 of Cr.P.C), praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavI't fI-led in support Of the Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the petitioner /A1, on bail in Crime No.180/2025 of Penamaluru police Statl®on, Krishna District. The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petI-lion and the grounds filed in support thereof and the orders of the High Court dated: 30.04.2025 and upon hearing the arguments of sri KADIYAM NEELAKANTESWARA RAO, Advocate for the petitioner and of puBLIC~ PROSECUTOR for the Respondent and the court made the following; /ti, =El // r6> ---- -I i.1 APHCO10203952025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE I MALLIKARJUNA RAO CRIIVl]NAL PETITION NO: 4310/2025 [3369] Between: 1. KONDURI MANIKANTA @ PANDU, S/O SUBBA RAJU, AGED ABOUT 26 YRS, HINDU,` R/0 D.NO-16-159, SUBBULAMMA VARI STREET, SANATH NAGAR, PENAMALURU MANDAL, VIJ,A`YAWADA, NTR DISTRICT. u.PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Represented by its Public Prosecutor High Court of Andhra Pradesh Through the S.H.O PS krishna Dist .MRESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT petition under section 437/438/439/482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS. praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Pet'ltion, the HI-gh Court may be pleased to enlarge the petitioner /A1, on bail I'n Crime No.180/2025 of Penamaluru Police Station, Krishna District and pass IANO: 1 OF2025 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the H-lgh Court may be pleased to enlarge the petitioner /All On interim bail in Crime No.180/2025 of Penamaluru Police Station, Krishna District to complete the law exams started from 22.04.2025 and pass lANO: 2OF2025 petition under section 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that I'n the circumstances stated jn the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal PetitI-On, the High Court may be pleased to issue summons or orders to the penamaluru police statI'On tO Submit CC footages of penamaluru Police Station from early hours of 1.00 clock on 24.03.2025 to 07.00 PM on the same day in the interest of`justice and pass IA NO: 3 OF2025 petit]-on under section 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that jn the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal petl'tion, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the petitioner on interim Ba" for 30 days to perform the rituals of her Mother. pending the cRLPNo 4310 of 2025. in the interest of justice and facts and circumstances of this case. IANO:4 OF 2025 petition under section 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS prayl'ng that in the circumsta.noes stated len the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to extend the I'nterim ba" orders to the petitioner passed in I.A. No.3 of 2025 in Crl.P.No.4310 of 2025 on the file of this Hon'ble Court for a period of 30 days and pass ]A NOI. 5 OF2025 petition under section 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to extend the interim ba" orders to the petitioner passed in LA. No.3 of 2025 I-n CrI.P.No.4310 of 2025 on the file of this Hon'ble Court for a perI'Od Of 15 days and pass Counsel for the petitioner/accused.- 1. KADIYAM NEELAKANTESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following ORDER-- 1. The Criminal Petition, under sections 480 & 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik suraksha sanhita, 2023, has been filed by the petitI-Oner/A-1, seekI-ng regular •.grS bail, in Crime No.180 of 2025 of Penamaluru Urban Police Stall-on, Krishna District. 2.I A case has been registered against the petitioner for the offences punishable under sections 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act. 3. The prosecutionJs case, in brief, is that, on 24.03.2025 at 06.30 hours, the Sub-Inspector of Police, Penamaluru PS, on credible information along with his staff and mediators went near Dhanekura College, EdpugaIIu- Ganguru Road, Ganguru Village, Penamaluru Mandal, and while conducting vehicle checking found an Auto bearing No.AP39 UP 2990. Upon seeing the police, A.1 and A.2 attempted to escape. On enquiry,I they revealed that they are transporting 22 Kgs of ganja to Vijayawada. On questioning, they revealed that they, along with A.3, are selling ganja to customers, which was purchased from A-4- 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was falsely implicated in the case; the petitioner is currently pursuing L.L.B., at Medarmetla Anjamma Mastan Rao Law College, with lSt semester exams scheduled from 22.04.2025 to 01.05.2025, a crucial period for his career; the petitioner was remanded to judicial custody on 24.03.2025, and since then, he has been in judicial custody at Central Prison, Nellore. 5. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, appearing for the Responden{- State, vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner on the ground that the investigation is still ongoing. 6o I have heard both sides. Learned counsel on either side reiterated their submissions on par with the contentions presented in the petition and the report- 7. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the contraband allegedly seized from the possession of the petitioners weighs 22 kgs; the definition of ganja only includes the flowering or fruiting tops of the cannabis - plant and excludes the seeds and leaves when not accompanied by the tops. ln support of hI-S COn{entiOn, he placed reliance on the decision of the High Court of Bombay 'ln criminal Application (BA) No.6O2 of 20241 viherein -It was observed that: 6... Thu.s the Pefirition of term 'ganja' defines and clarifies that 'ganja' is the floyering or fruiting tops of the cannabis plant excluding the seed:s a-nd leaves when not accompanied by the tops. In the case in hand, as seen from the FIR ?rd the_ipvestigation papers, the quantity of 50 kg. of ganja was seized from thevehicle...................... 7................ on perusal of the material on record shows that whatwas seized was pl?rt i.e. I.eaves, seeds, stems and stalks and without separating the sa.y]e, the g?.nja was weighed. As the seized material was not weighea and aft.:,r :ep?.rating the le_aves and the other parts, and moreover, it is-not along with .the flowering or fruiting tops. Therefore, it is difficult to ascertain wheth:r quantity can be said to be commercial. 9, lt is significant to note that the definition of 'ganja' under NDPS Act takes in its ambit only the flowering or fruiting tops of cannabis plant and excludes the seeds and leaves when not accompanied by the tops. Thus, the definition of [g_pnja' is rpstricted and it does not include the seeds and leaves of ganja plant. The pan:han?ma and seizure do not reflect presence of floweririg ;r f;uiting tops on the plant. 8. ln the mediators' report, it is stated that upon opening the packets, the Investigating officer and the mediators observed dry leaves, flowers, seeds, stems, and stalks, collectively wel-ghing approximately 22 kI-Iograms. ln light of the observations made in the decision as mentioned above, there arises a doubt as to whether the seized material constitutes a commercial quantity of ganja. 9. At this stage, the allegations against the petitI-Oner are subject to the triaI's outcome. The trial is anticipated to take a considerable amount of time. Bail serves the purpose of allowing an accused to remain free until his guilt or innocence is determined. lt is settled law that mere apprehension that `the accused would tamper with the prosecution evidence or intimidate the witnesses cannot be grounds to refuse baI-I unless the prosecution shows that the accused tried for such tampering/intimidation. ? / 10. The petitioner's continued preventive custody cannot be based on an unsubstantiated suspicion that.he might tamper with the evidence or influence witnesses. Given the penal provisions invoked viz-a-viz pre-t'rial custody, coupled with the prima facie analysis of the nature of allegations and the other factors peculiar to this case, there would be no justifiability further pre-trial incarceration at this stage, subject to the compliance of terms and conditions mentioned in this order. ll. The material on record indicates that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 24.03.2025, by this tI'me, a Significant POrtiOn Of the investigation may have been concluded. Furthermore, the petitioner has a fixed place of residence, making it highly improbable that he would abscond if granted bail, The trial's commencement is uncertain as the investigation is incomplete, furthermore, as most of the witnesses are official witnesses, the release of the accused is unlikely to hamper the investigation or result in tampering with evidence. Therefore, this court finds no risk of the petitioner tampering with witnesses or hampering the investigation. However, in light of the nature of the allegations, this court will impose stringent conditions to ensure the petitioner's attendance during the investigation and trial. 12. Given the above facts and circumstances, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner/A.1, subject to the following conditions: (i) The petitioner/A.1 shall be released on executing personal bond for Rs.50,OOO/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) each with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned VI Additional Judicial Magistrate of First CIass, Vijayawada. (ii) After release, the petitioner shall appear before the Station House Officer concerned, once in a week i.e., on every Sunday between 10.00 AM and 05.00 PM for a per-lod of (03) months. I+I_---__--' (iii) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly contact or threaten the witnesses under any circumstances, and any such attempt shall be construed as an attempt to influence the witnesses, shall not tamper with evidence, and shall cooperate with the investigation. (iv) lt is made clear that the petitioner shall scrupulously comply with the above conditions and breach of any of the above conditions will be viewed seriously and prosecution is at liberty to move an application for cancellation of the bail. However, nothing expressed hereinabove shall be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. 13. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is a//owed, Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. SD/- K.J.R ASSISTAN; //TRUE COPY// l¢|`. JA BABU REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER For.__ To, 1. The VI Additional JFCM, Vijayawada and ll Addl. District and Sessions ,cz~- Judge at Vijayawada. ---, 2. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Nellore. 3. TheS.H.O Penamaluru Urban PS, Krishna Dist. 7gr 4. One CC to SRl. KADIYAM NEELAKANTESWARA RAO Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two cos to the PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court ofA.P [OPUC] 6. One spare copy .-- ` HIGHCOURT TMR,J DATED:14/07/2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.4310 of 2025 ALLOWED \