IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMAR MONDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE iPRESENT: THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6693 OF 2025 Between: Sunindra Kumar Singh, S/o Nityananda Singh, Age. 40 years, R/o Udayagiri (Village and Post), Gajapathi District, Orissa state ... Petitioner/Accused No.2 . AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh, represented by the Public Prosecutor for High Court of A.P through Station House Officer, Maredumilli PS, ASR District .... Respondent/Complainant Petition under Section 480 and 483 of BNSS, 2023 is filed, praying that fn the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the Petitioner/ accused No. 2 on Regular Bail in Crime No 15 of 2025 of Maredumiili Police Station, on such terms and conditions. The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of SRi TORATI SHANMUKHA PRASANNA Advocate for the Petitioner, Assistant Public Prosecutor for the respondent and the Court made the following. ORDER Jf' h! 1// APHC010326352025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] MONDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6693/20?^ Between: 1.SUNINDRA KUMAR SINGH, S/O NITYANANDA SINGH YEARS, R/0 UDAYAGIRI (VILLAGE AND POST), GAJAPATHI DISTRICT, ORISSA STATE AGE. 40 ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH Prosecutor for High Court of A.P through Station House Officer Maredumilli PS, ASR District represented by the Public ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1.TORATI SHANMUKHA PRASANNA Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER: The Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’) by the petitioner/Accused No.2 for granting of bail in connection with Crime No. 15 of 2 2025 of Maredumili Police Station, ASR District, registered for the alleged offences punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) r/w 8(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for brevity ‘the NDPS Act’). 2. The case of the prosecution is that on 11.03.2025 at 4:00 PM, at the outskirts of Madduluru village, Maredumilli Mandal, Accused No.2 Sunindra Kumar Singh was apprehended for illegal possession and transportation of Ganja. He was transporting the contraband from Rajamahendravaram, in active collusion with Accused No.1 Subhash of Barampuram, Orissa absconding. Authorities seized 67 KGs of Ganja two bags of 25 KGs and one bag of 17 KGs, valued at approximately Rs. 3,35,000/-, along with a white Toyota Etios GD car Reg. No.HR35H-5858, Engine No.1ND1280160, Chassis No.MBJB4ZBT100039584, and a black Karbonn Jio-Bharat mobile phone. The seizure and arrest were recorded under a mediators’ report in the presence of Sri Ch. Balaji Maredumilli, and two mediators. The case was reported the same day at 6:30 PM. Since then, the petitioner/accused has been in judicial custody. Darakonda to Tahsildar, 3. Sri. T.Shanmukha Prasanna, the learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offence and has been falsely implicated by the police. It is further submitted that the petitioner is the sole earning member of the family and, he is ready to abide any conditions that may be imposed by this Court, and it is urged to grant bail to the petitioner. 4. Per contra, Ms.P.Akhila Naidu, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner, submitting that the investigation is still underway and several material witnesses remain to be examined. It is contended that if the petitioner is released on bail, there is a strong likelihood that he may abscond, thereby hampering the investigation and evading the process of law. In view of the foregoing, it is urged that the petition be dismissed. ongoing 5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 6. As seen from the record, the petitioner/accused No.2 was allegedly transporting 67 KGs of Ganja which is a commercial quantity. The petitioner was arrested on the spot on 11.03.2025. The only incriminating material against the Petitioner is confession before the Police, and co-accused confession. 7. Section 36A(4) of ‘the Act’ states that if the investigation is not completed within 180 days, the petitioner/accused No.2 has an indefeasible right to bail, unless the Special Court extends the period up to one year on the report of the Public Prosecutor, indicating the progress of the investigation and specific reasons for the detention of the accused beyond the initial period. 8. Keeping in view of the nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the petitioners, and their alleged role in the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail with the following stringent conditions. 4 9. In the result, the Criminal Petition is allowed with the following conditions: i. The petitioner/accused No.2 shall be enlarged on bail subject to them executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only), with two sureties each for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Rampachodavaram. The petitioner/accused No.2 shall appear before the Station House Officer, Maredumilli Police Station, Alluri Sitharama Raju District, on every Saturday in between 10:00 am and 05:00 pm, till cognizance is taken by the learned the Trial Court, iii. The petitioner/accused No.2 shall not leave the limits of the District without prior permission from the Station House Officer concerned. ii. The petitioner/accused No.2 shall not commit or indulge in commission of any offence in future. iV. V. The petitioner/accused No.2 shall cooperate with the investigating officer in further investigation of the case and shall make himself available for interrogation by the investigating officer as and when required. Vi. The petitioner/accused No.2 shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person 5 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. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. 10. SD/- P.VINOD KUMAR STRAR ASSISTANT //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Judicial Firs. Class Magistrate, a. Rampachodavaram The Superintendent, Rajahmundry Central Prison The Station House Officer, Maredumilii PS, ASR District. One CC to SRI. TORATI SHANMUKHA PRASANNA Advocate [OPUCl Two CCS to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High COUP Of Andhra Pradesh.[OUT] 6. One spare copy f 2. 3. 4. 5. HIGH COURT DR.YLR, J DATED: 18/08/2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.6693 of 2025 ALLOWED is 21 WE 2® ^.<5. ■5^ C3 m CO OE- ★