1 . IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI TUESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 84 OF 2025 Between: 1. Sandeep Kumar Dangi, S/o Balmat, Aged about 34 years, R/o 40, 1, Madir Kehar (22), Bhiwani, Haryana State. ...Petitioner / 3'^'^ party / GPA of Vehicle 2. Vinsum Axpress India Pvt. Ltd.,, First Floor, 404 Phase - IV, Udyod Vihar. Gurugram Tmp, VPO Amai, Teh-Kotpurli, Jaipur, Rajasthan State-122015. ...3’^'* party / Owner of Vehicle AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by S.H.O, Anadapuram P.S through Public Prosecutor High Court of A.P, Amaravathi. ...Respondent Petition under Section 528 of B.N.S.S, (Under Section Cr.P.C) praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to call for the records relating to Order Dt.20-09-2024, passed in CrI.M.P No.353 of 2024 in Crime No.50 of 2024, On the file of the I Additional District & Sessions 482 of Judge - Special Judge for Trial of Offences under N.D.P.S ACT, Visakhapatnam. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri T V Jaggi Reddy, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor behalf of the Respondent. on The Court made the following: APHC010000222025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE [3368] PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 84/2025 Between: Sandeep Kumar Dangi and Others ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1.T V JAGGI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following order; This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioners, under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, to modify the order dated 20.09.2024 passed in Crl.M.P.No.353 of 2024 in Crime No.50 of 2024, on the file of the learned I Additional District & Sessions Judge-Special Judge for Trial of Offences under NDPS Act, Visakhapatnam. 1 : 2 Heard Sri T.V.Jaggi Reddy, learned counsel for the 2. petitioners. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor takes notice on behalf of the respondent/State. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioner No.2 is the registered owner of the lorry bearing registration No.RJ 32 GC 6433 and the driver of the vehicle was shown as accused in Crime No.50 of 2024 of Anandapuram Police Station, Visakhapatnam Commissionerate District. While so, the Police seized the lorry in connection with Crime No.50 of 2024 of Anandapuram Police Station, Visakhapatnam Commissionerate District, for the offences punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(c) read with 8(c) of NDPS Act, 1985 alleging that contraband was transported in the vehicle. He would further submit that the petitioner No.2/owner of the vehicle has no knowledge about the transport of contraband in the lorry and also the petitioners are not arrayed as accused to the case. Hence, the petitioners filed application under Section 457 Cr.P.C., before the learned I Additional District & Sessions Judge-Special Judge for Trial of Offences under NDPS Act, Visakhapatnam for release of the vehicle, for interim custody. Learned Special Judge vide order dated 20.09.2024 allowed the Crl.M.P.No.353 of 2024 by 3 imposing a condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for Rs.22,50,000/- and a bank guarantee for Rs.22,50,000/- for release of the vehicle, for interim custody. Learned counsel for the petitioners would further submit that the petitioners will execute a personal bond as ordered by the learned Special Judge, but the condition asking the petitioners to furnish bank guarantee for an amount of Rs.22,50,000/- is onerous and the petitioners cannot furnish a bank guarantee for the said amount and therefore, the order of the learned Special Judge cannot be complied with and the vehicle still remains with the police which may damage the vehicle permanently. In that view of the matter the petitioners approached this Court for modification of the order of the learned Special Judge to the extent of furnishing bank guarantee, as ordered by the learned Special Judge. / The aforementioned facts and circumstances would 4. disclose that the petitioner No.2 is the registered owner of the crime vehicle and the details of the case did not indicate any knowledge of the petitioners regarding commission of the alleged crime. In those circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that allowing the vehicle to remain idle causes damage to the vehicle and will not serve any purpose. Therefore, this Court is of the w 4 considered opinion that the order of the learned Special Judge imposing the condition of furnishing bank guarantee for Rs.22,50,000/- is not appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the case and requires modification. Accordingly, the order of the learned Special Judge is modified by deleting the condition of furnishing bank guarantee of Rs.22,50,000/- and the other part of the order of the learned Special Judge will remain intact. 5. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of at the stage of admission itself. As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. SD/- N NAGAMMA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// /^CSECTION OFFICER To. \ 1. The I Additional District & Sessions Judge-Spl. Judge for Trial of Offences under NDPS Act, Visakhapatnam. 2. The Station House Officer, Anadapuram 3. One CC to Sri. T V Jaggi Reddy, AdvocatefOPUC] 4. Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court 5. Three CD Copies P S, Vishakhapatnam District. of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] PR vna in HIGH COURT DATED;07/01/2025 ORDER g 0 8 JAN 2025 M CRLP.No.84 of 2025 . Current Section ^ Disposing of the crlp