1 APHC010217662025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3505] THURSDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR CRIMINAL PETITION NOS: 4638 AND 4862 OF 2025 CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4638/2025 Between: Netaji Muthuthevara and Others ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4862/2025 Between: Sundar Pandi. Ukkaira Pandi ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. P NAGENDRA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 2 The Court made the following Common Order: The Criminal Petitions have been filed under Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’), seeking to enlarge the petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3 on bail in Cr.No.89 of 2025 of the Prohibition & Excise Station, Nellore-II, registered against the petitioners/Accused herein for the offence punishable under Sections 8© read with 20 (b)(II)(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for brevity ‘the NDPS Act’). 2. The case of the prosecution in nutshell is that on 04.04.2025 the Excise officials searched the RTC buses, they found accused No.1 to 3 , who were travelling from Vijayawada to Tirupathi in a Super Luxury bus, in possession of ganja and recovered 2.250 Kgs of ganja from accused No.2 and 4.500 kgs. of ganja from accused No.3, and 13.500 kgs of ganja from the possession of accused No.1. It is further submitted that all the accused purchased ganja from accused No.4 with a view to sell the same. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 4. Sri. P.Nagendra Reddy, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have not committed any 3 offence; petitioners were falsely implicated by the police in the crime; petitioners are the sole breadwinners; petitioners would abide by any conditions to be imposed by this Court; and urged to allow the petition. 5. Per contra, Ms.P.Akila Naidu, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, opposed the bail application stating that the petitioners are habitual offenders, some more material witnesses have to be examined; investigation is not completed; if the petitioners are enlarged on bail, they would not be available for the investigation and they would escape from the clutches of law; and urged to dismiss the bail petition. 6. As seen from the record, the petitioners have been in the judicial custody since 04.04.2025. If the petitioners are enlarged on bail with stringent conditions, they would not flee away from the clutches of the law, and interest of the justice would be served. 7. Keeping in view of the period of detention undergone by the petitioners in judicial custody for more than 60 days, the nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the petitioners, and their alleged role in the case, this Court is inclined to 4 enlarge the petitioners on bail with the following stringent conditions. 8. In the result, the criminal petition is allowed with the following conditions: i. The petitioners shall be enlarged on bail subject to the executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only), with two sureties each for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate of First class for Trial of Prohibition & Excise offences, Nellore. ii. The petitioners shall appear before the Station House Officer, Prohibition & Excise Station, Nellore- II, on every Saturday in between 10:00 am and 05:00 pm, till cognizance is taken by the learned the Trial Court. iii. The petitioners shall not leave the limits of the District without prior permission from learned Judicial Magistrate of First class for Trial of Prohibition & Excise offences, Nellore. iv. The petitioners shall not commit or indulge in commission of any offence in future. 5 v. The petitioners shall cooperate with the investigating officer in further investigation of the case and shall make themselves available for interrogation by the investigating officer as and when required. vi. The petitioners shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer. _________________________ JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR Date: 05.06.2025 KGR/JLV