_,? [3369] IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI w€w;of`ngfiap FRIDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE :PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T MALLIKARJuNA RAO CRIIVIINAL PETITION NO: 4909 OF 2025 Effi- Between : 1. Murugan Karuthakkan, s/o. Karuthakkan, aged about 55 years, R/o. East Street, Andipatti, Maniyarampatti Taluk ThenI- District, Tamil Nadu State. 2, ThangammaI Muthuirulan, w/o. MuthuI-rulan, aged about 55 years, R/o. Nagamalai pudur, vadapalanji, Madhurai, Tamil Nadu State. Petitioner/Accused no.1,2 AND The State ofAndhra pradesh, Rep by its public prosecutor, High Court of Andhra pradesh. Respondent petitI-On under SectI-OnS 480 & 483 of BN`SS (old Sections 437 & 439 of cr.p.c), praying that in the circumstances stated in the affI'daVit filed in support of the crim]-hal Petition, the HI-gh Court may be pleased {o enlarge the petitioners/Accused No.1, 2 on ba" pending disposal of Crime Not 31/2025 of Ravikamatham p.s., now AnakapaIIi DI-Strict. The petition coming on for hearingJ upon Perusing the PetitI'On and the grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of srj GOLLAPALLI MAHESWARA RAO, Advocate for the petitioners and of PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent and the court made the foIIowI'ng,- ORDER-. .i This Criminal Petition u/Sec.480 and 483 of B.N.S.S. has been filed by the petitioners/Al to A2 seeking regular bail `in Cr,No.31/2025 of Ravikamatham Police Station, Anakapalli District. 2. The above said crime was registered against the Petitioners for the offence punishable u/sec. 20(b)(ii)(B) I/w 8(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act,1985 (for short lthe NDPS Act'). I 3. Case of the prosecution in brief, is that, on 15,4.2025 at ll.00 hours, on receipt of credible information about illegal possession and transportation of ganja, the Sub Inspector of police, along with his staff and mediators rushed to outskirts of Ravikamatham Village and found two persons in suspicious circumstances. On seeing police, they tried to ran away. Then police apprehended them and on enquiry, they disclosed their identity particulars as that of Al to A2 and police found 08 kgs of ganja in their possession. Then police arrested the accused, seized the cohtraband and sent the accused to Court for judicial remand. Al and A2 confessed about the involvement of other accused in the present crime. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners/Al to A2 contended that even according to the case of the prosecution, the petitI'OnerS Were arrested When they were found in possession of 8 kgs of ganja, which is a non-commercial quantity and the petitioners were languishing in jail from 15.4.2025 and prays to allow the criminal pe{ition] --i-=== r-i,i- = 5. On the other hand, learned Ass]'stant public Prosecutor opposed for grant of baj[ to the petitl'oners but fairly conceded that the contraband seized is below commercial quantity. 6. Heardbothsides. 7. perused the entire materI'al on record. 8. Learned counsel for the petjtjoners submI'tted that the contraband alleged to be se]'zed from the possession of the petitioners Its Only 08 kgs of ganja whI|Ch jS not commercial quantj{y. The pe{itl'oners have been jn judicial custody from 15.4.2025 and they are permanent residents of TamI'l Nadu state. As the contraband seized is not of commercial quantity, no reasons need to be recorded as contemplated under section 37 of the NDPS Act. Most of the wI-tneSSeS are shown to be official witnesses and the release of the accused would not cause hampering of ['nves{jgation. As most of the I[nVeStjgatjon might have been completed and the petitioners have permanent abode and there is no possibI'lj{y Of his fleeing away from justice, as such, this court is inclI'ned to grant bail {o the petI't,-OnerS. 9. [n the result, the criminal petition js allowed with the following condjtI'OnS.I i. The petitioners/Al to A2 herein sha" be released on ba" on their executing personal bond for Rs.10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand only) each with two (o2) suretI-eS for a II'ke Sum each to the satl'sfactI'On Of the learned I Additional District & sessions Judge-special Judge for Trial of Offences under `NDPS Act, Visakhapatnam ,I FEB5itiEife5ZH±Egiv-/, ii) After release, the petitioners shall attend before the Station House Officer concerned once ill a Week in between 10.00 am to 01.00 pm for a -period of two (02) months; and iii) that the petitioners are directed not to hamper the investigation and tal:tpe:r_ ::he tnha:mp:oafs:hc:tlsoanti::lancet::enscou rf IS COrreCted Vide Court±Qngb dated 31/7/25 in IA No.1 of 25 as fE[ Additional Dis1:riot & Sessions Judge| Special Juclge for Trial of Offences under NDPS Act, Visakhapatnam". Substitute this amended order in the place of earlier order which was dispatched on 13/05/25. Sd/-N. NAGAMMA ASS For ASSIS //TRUE COPY// ISTRAR ISTRAR To, 1. The I Additional District & Sessions Judge -Special Judge for Trial of Offences under NDPS Act, Visakhapatnam 2. The Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Chodavaram. 3. The Superintendent, central Jail, Visakhapatnam 4. The Station House Officer, Ravikamatham P.S., now Anakapalli District 5. One CC to SRI. GOLLAPALLI MAHESWARA RAO Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two cos to Public Prosecutor, High Court ofAP [OUT] 7. One spare copy KJ t= .- HIGH COURT TMR,J DATED : 09/05/2025 (31 /07/2025) BAIL ORDER AMENDED CRLP.No.4909 of 2025 ALLOWED _fu`**`:i.\#iNREih` <^.I-(:`'` . .u+ I_.I ~I^',.-_ i