IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3521 ] WEDNESDAY ,THE TENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE :PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO}?' CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7532 OF 2025 ■K ao Between: 7 1. Sankuru Buchi Reedy alias Buchi, S/o Pandu Reddy Aged 24 Y^rew C/ST, Rampachodavaram Village And Mandal ASR District. Murla Chinna Reddy Jetly, S/o Somireddy Aged 24 years C/ST Konda Reddy D.NO.4-1 l,Santha Market Reddy Peta, Rampachodavaram. Mandal ASR District. 2. 3. Ulugula Ravikiran Reddy @ Pandu, S/o Chinna Reddy, Aged 27 years C/27 years ^C/ST Kondareddy R/o D.No. 1-150, MPP School. Boosigudem Village Rampachodavara Petitioner/Accused-A-3 to A-5 AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Judicature of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati. Respondent/Complainant Petition under Sections 437 and 439 of Cr.P.C(New Sections 480 and 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita,2023), is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the memorandum of grounds filed in support of the Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to release the petitioners on bail in Cr.No. 119/2025 Rajanagaram PoliceStation East Godavari. The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the memorandum of grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Ms.KOPPISETTI PARVATI DEVI, Advocate for the Petitioner and of PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for Respondent, the Court made the following ORDER 2 ORDER: This criminal petition has been filed under Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking to enlarge the petitioners- accused Nos. 3 to 5 on bail in crime No. 119 of 2025 of Rajanagaram Police Station, Rajamahendravaram, East Godavari District, registered for the offence punishable under Section 20 (b) (ii) (C) read with Section 8 (c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. CASE OF THE PROSECUTION: On 11-03-2025 at about 4 a.m. in Kontamuru Village of 2. Rajamahendravaram Rural, the Sub Inspector of Police along with his staff and mediators found accused Nos. 1 to 5 while they were transporting 150 Thereafter, the police seized the contraband, arrested accused Nos. 1 to 5 and remanded them to judicial custody. K.Gs. of Ganja. CONTENTIONS OF LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER: Smt. K.Parvathi Devi, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that 3. the petitioners are innocents and have been falsely implicated in the alleged offence, without any cogent evidence linking to the commission of the crime. It is contended that the petitioners are the sole breadwinners of their families and their arrest would cause undue hardship and prejudice to the dependents of the petitioners. The petitioners undertake to abide by any condition that this Court may impose while granting bail to the petitioners. It is further submitted that the petitioners have permanent places of residence and there is no likelihood of them absconding or evading the 4. 3 process of law. The petitioners have cooperated with the investigation thus far and assure continued cooperation in future proceedings. It is also urged that the allegations are of a nature that do not warrant custodial interrogation, and if any condition is imposed while granting the bail, the petitioners would violate it; and it is urged to allow the petition. not ARGUMENTS OF THE STATE: 5. Per contra, Ms.Akhila Naidu, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, strenuously opposed the grant of bail, contending that the investigation is still underway and several material witnesses are yet to be examined. It is submitted that enlargement of the petitioners on bail at this stage would seriously hamper the progress of the investigation and may result in non cooperation from the petitioners. The prosecution further apprehends that the petitioners, if released may influence or intimidate witnesses, thereby obstructing the course of justice. It is also urged that there exists a real and imminent risk of the petitioners absconding and evading the due process of law. Given the gravity of the allegations and the potential threat to the integrity of the investigation, it is submitted that the petitioners do not deserve the discretionary relief of bail and it is urged to dismiss the bail petition. 6. Thoughtful consideration is bestowed on the arguments advanced by learned counsel for both sides. I have perused the entire record. POINT FOR CONSIDERATION: 7. In the light of the case of the prosecution and the contentions of learned counsel for both sides, now the point for consideration is: 4 Whether the petitioners are entitled for grant of bail? ANALYSIS: 8. ’ As seen from the record, it is the case of prosecution that the petitioners-accused Nos. 3 to 5 had indulged in dealing with 150 K.Gs.of Ganja which is a commercial quantity. The petitioners were spot arrested on 11-03-2025. They have been in judicial custody for the past 180 days. Charge sheet has not been filed within the statutory period. Within the default period of 180 days, no application has been filed seeking for extension of judicial custody of the petitioners before the jurisdictional Court concerned. \ The petitioners are permanent residents of Rampachodavaram Village and Mandal, Alluri Sitarama Raju District. Major portion of the investigation is completed. Material witnesses have been examined. Hence, the chances of the petitioners threatening the witnesses or tampering the evidence or hampering the investigation further may not arise. CONCLUSION: Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature and gravity of allegations levelled against the petitioners, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail with the following stringent conditions: 9. The petitioners-accused Nos. 3 to 5 shall be enlarged on bail subject to their executing each a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of learned Principal Junior Civil Judge - cum - Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Rajamahendravaram; (i) 5 (ii) The petitioners-accused Nos. 3 to 5 shall appear before the Station House Officer concerned on every Saturday in between 10:00 am and 05:00 pm till cognizance is taken by learned trial Court; (iii) The petitioners-accused Nos. 3 to 5 shall not leave the limits of the District without prior permission from the Station House Officer concerned; (iv) The petitioners-accused Nos. 3 to 5 shall not commit or indulge in commission of any offence in future; The petitioners-accused Nos. 3 to 5 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; The petitioners-accused Nos. 3 to 5 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; and (V) (Vi) (vii) The petitioners-accused Nos. 3 to 5 shall surrender their passports, if any, to the investigating officer. If they claim that they do not have a passport, they shall submit affidavit to that effect to the Investigating Officer. an 6 The criminal petition is accordingly allowed. 10. SDI- G.HELANAIDU ASS!STANTI\REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// For . Mn I KfcGISTRAR To, 1. the Principal Civil Judge(Junior Division) Judge cum Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Rajahmundry. The Superintendent, Central prison, Rajahmundery. The SHO., Rajanagaram Police,Station East Godavari. One CC to SRI. KOPPISETTI PARVATI DEVI Advocate [OPUC] Two CCs to th^ PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court of A.P [OPUC] One spare copy 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. psk HIGH COURT DR.YLR.J DATED:10/09/2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.7532 of 2025 ALLOWED