APHC010353222025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY,THE FIRST DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7314/2025 Between: 1. BANAVATHU BHANU PRAKASH ALIAS BANU, S/O GOBRIYA NAIK AGED 26 YEARS C/ST LAMBADI, R/O MACHAPALEM VILLAGE, BELLAMKONDA MANDAL PALNADU DISTRICT 1. THE STATE OF AP, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Judicature of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati. Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. KOPPISETTI PARVATI DEVI Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER: The Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 437 and 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity ‘the Cr.P.C. 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking to enlarge the petit Maredumilli Police Station, IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY,THE FIRST DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7314/2025 BANAVATHU BHANU PRAKASH ALIAS BANU, S/O GOBRIYA NAIK AGED 26 YEARS C/ST LAMBADI, R/O MACHAPALEM VILLAGE, BELLAMKONDA MANDAL PALNADU DISTRICT ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND THE STATE OF AP, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Judicature of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: KOPPISETTI PARVATI DEVI Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: The Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 437 and 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity ‘the Cr.P.C.,’)/Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the o enlarge the petitioner/Accused No.1 on bail in Cr.No.80 of 2024 of Maredumilli Police Station, East Godavari District, registered against the IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3521] THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO BANAVATHU BHANU PRAKASH ALIAS BANU, S/O GOBRIYA NAIK AGED 26 YEARS C/ST LAMBADI, R/O MACHAPALEM VILLAGE, ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED THE STATE OF AP, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT The Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 437 and 439 of the ’)/Sections 480 and (for brevity ‘the BNSS’), ioner/Accused No.1 on bail in Cr.No.80 of 2024 of against the 2 petitioner/Accused No.1 herein for the offences punishable under Section 8(c) read with 20 (b) (ii)(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for brevity ‘the NDPS Act’). CASE OF THE PROSECUTION: 2. The case of the prosecution is that on 24.09.2024 at 2.00 PM at madduluru Village and mandal wherein the Sub-Inspector of Police arrested A3 to A6 while they were in possession and transportation of Ganja from Darakonda Village to Razole with the active support A1 and A2 and the SI of Police, Maredumilli seized 22 kgs of Ganja apart from seizing Honda Dio motorcycle No.AP39CS 8210, Bajaj Pulsar motorcycle No.AP37CU 8683, three mobile phones under cover of mediators report in the presence of mediators. Consequently, the above said crime has been registered against the accused. Subsequently, the petitioner/A1 has been apprehended by the police on 03.06.2025 on his surrender. CONTENTIONS OF THE COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER: 3. Ms. Kopisetti Parvathi Devi, 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, therefore, his continued incarceration would cause undue hardship to his dependents. The petitioner undertakes to strictly adhere to any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and it is urged to allow this Petition. 3 ARGUMENTS OF THE STATE: 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 at this stage, there is a strong likelihood that he may abscond, thereby hampering the ongoing investigation and evading the process of law. In view of the foregoing, it is urged that the petition be dismissed. POINT FOR CONSIDERATION: 5. In the light of the case of the prosecution and the contentions of the learned Counsel for both the sides, now the point for consideration is: “Whether the Petitioner is entitled for grant of bail?” ANALYSIS: 6. As seen from the record, the petitioner/Accused No.1 was indulged in transportation and possession of 10 kgs of ganja separately from his possession. The alleged seizure of ganja is not a commercial quantity. The petitioner was arrested on 03.06.2025. He has been in judicial custody for the past 90 days. Learned Single Judge of this Court in Crl.P.No.1919 of 2025 on 28.02.2025 enlarged Accused No.5 on bail. Similarly, another learned Single Judge of this Court in Crl.P.No.2159 of 2025 on 27.03.2025 enlarged Accused No.2 on bail.The petitioner is also standing on the similar footing. Investigation was already completed. Even though the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that the petitioner/Accused No.1 has got two adverse antecedents, 4 until the guilt is proved, the petitioner is presumed to be innocent. CONCLUSION: 7. Considering the period of detention undergone by the petitioner/Accused No.1 in judicial custody for the past 90 days, the nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the petitioner, and his alleged role played in the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail with the following stringent conditions: i. The petitioner/Accused No.1 shall be enlarged on bail subject to he executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only), with two sureties each for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Rampachodavaram. ii. The petitioner/Accused No.1 shall appear before the Station House Officer concerned twice in a week on every Wednesday and 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.1 shall not leave the limits of the district without prior permission from the Station House Officer concerned. iv. The petitioner/Accused No.1 shall not commit or indulge in commission of any offence in future. v. The petitioner/Accused No.1 shall cooperate with the 5 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.1 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. 8. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 01.09.2025 AG THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO 6 CRIMINAL PETITION No.7314 of 2025 Date:01.09.2025 AG